Sofosbuvir and ribavirin for treatment of compensated recurrent hepatitis C virus infection after liver transplantation

Treatment of hepatitis C in patients with cirrhosis: remaining challenges for direct-acting antiviral therapy

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major global health concern, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Treatment using interferon-based therapy in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis has been problematic due to toxicity and poor tolerability. Furthermore, interferon therapy is contraindicated in those with advanced cirrhosis or clinical decompensation, who are arguably the group most in need of viral eradication. The arrival of the direct-acting antiviral (DAA) era has resulted in the development of well-tolerated and highly effective interferon-free drug regimens that promise to dramatically change the therapeutic landscape for those with advanced HCV-related liver disease, including patients with clinical decompensation or pre-liver transplantation. Many successful DAA combinations have emerged; however, a number of challenges remain including the establishment of the optimal treatment duration, the ideal combination of drug classes and determining the role of ribavirin. Moreover, the identification of treatment-experienced patients with genotype 3 HCV cirrhosis as a difficult-to-treat subgroup is a significant impediment to overcome, as are those who have failed prior DAA therapy. Despite these barriers, the ongoing prolific development of safe and effective DAA combinations indicates the future is optimistic for the ultimate goal of HCV eradication.

The importance of resistance to direct antiviral drugs in HCV infection in clinical practice

Treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) is associated with high rates of sustained virologic response. Remaining factors associated with treatment failure include advanced stages of liver fibrosis, response to previous antiviral therapy and viral factors such as baseline viral load and suboptimal interaction of the DAA with the target based on viral variants. Heterogeneity within NS3, NS5A, and NS5B areas interacting with DAAs exist between HCV geno- and subtypes as well as HCV isolates of the same geno- and subtype and amino acid polymorphisms associated with suboptimal efficacy of DAAs are termed resistance-associated variants (RAVs). RAVs may be associated with virologic treatment failure. However, virologic treatment failure typically occurs only if other negative predictive host or viral factors are present at the same time, susceptibility to additional antiviral agents is reduced or duration of treatment is suboptimal. In this review geno- and phenotypic resistance testing as well as clinical data on the importance of RAVs for conventional triple therapies with sofosbuvir, simeprevir, and daclatasvir and available interferon-free DAA combinations are discussed.

Course of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA and HCV core antigen testing are predictors for reaching sustained virologic response in liver transplant recipients undergoing sofosbuvir treatment in a real-life setting

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is associated with reduced graft survival in orthotopic liver transplant recipients. Treatment with the new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is safe and efficient, but no reliable predictive factors for sustained virologic response (SVR) have been identified so far. The HCV core antigen assay (HCV-core-Ag) is a new, inexpensive, and efficient method to detect viral antigens, but the value of this technique to predict treatment response in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) patients is still unclear.

METHODS

All OLT patients who were treated with a sofosbuvir-based antiviral regimen at our center between March 2014 and August 2014 were included in the analysis (n = 20). HCV-core-Ag and HCV RNA (polymerase chain reaction [PCR]) were determined at each visit. Primary endpoints of this study were SVR at 4 or 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR 4 and SVR 12).

RESULTS

HCV-core-Ag tested negative after a median of 2 weeks (range 1-16 weeks) while PCR tests became negative after a median of 4 weeks (range 2-12 weeks). Time until PCR negativity and until HCV-core-Ag negativity showed a good correlation (R = 0.711, P < 0.001, Fig. ). Seventeen of 20 patients (85%) achieved SVR 12. SVR 12 was associated with a short time interval between treatment start and HCV PCR negativity (P = 0.005) or HCV-core-Ag negativity (P = 0.003, Mann-Whitney test). No severe side effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

DAA treatment is safe and well tolerated in OLT. The time points of HCV-core-Ag loss and PCR negativity were predictors of SVR 12.

Liver transplantation for viral hepatitis in 2015

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease and for patients with liver cell cancer related to liver disease. Acute and chronic liver diseases related to hepatitis viruses are between the main indications for liver transplantation. The risk of viral reinfection after transplantation is the main limiting factor in these indications. Before the availability of antiviral prophylaxis, hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence was universal in patients who were HBV DNA-positive before transplantation. The natural history of recurrent HBV was accelerated by immunosuppression, and it progressed rapidly to graft failure and death. Introduction of post-transplant prophylaxis with immunoglobulin alone first, and associated to antiviral drugs later, drastically reduced HBV recurrence, resulting in excellent long-term outcomes. On the contrary, recurrence of hepatitis C is the main cause of graft loss in most transplant programs. Overall, patient and graft survival after LT for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated cirrhosis is inferior compared with other indications. However, successful pretransplant or post transplant antiviral therapy has been associated with increased graft and overall survival. Until recently, the combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin was the standard of care for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C. Highly active antiviral compounds have been developed over the past decade, thanks to new in vitro systems to study HCV entry, replication, assembly, and release.

New approaches in the treatment of hepatitis C

About 130-170 million people, is estimated to be infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV). Chronic HCV infection is one of the leading causes of liver-related death and in many countries it is the primary reason for having a liver transplant. The main aim of antiviral treatment is to eradicate the virus. Until a few years ago the only treatment strategy was based on the combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG/RBV). However, in genotypes 1 and 4 the rates of viral response did not surpass 50%, reaching up to 80% in the rest. In 2011 approval was given for the first direct acting antiviral agents (DAA), boceprevir and telaprevir, for treatment of genotype 1, in combination with traditional dual therapy. This strategy managed to increase the rates of sustained viral response (SVR) in both naive patients and in retreated patients, but with greater toxicity, interactions and cost, as well as being less safe in patients with advanced disease, in whom this treatment can trigger decompensation or even death. The recent, accelerated incorporation since 2013 of new more effective DAA, with pan-genomic properties and excellent tolerance, besides increasing the rates of SVR (even up to 100%), has also created a new scenario: shorter therapies, less toxicity and regimens free of PEG/RBV. This has enabled their almost generalised applicability in all patients. However, it should be noted that most of the scientific evidence available is based on expert opinion, case-control series, cohort studies and phase 2 and 3 trials, some with a reduced number of patients and select groups. Few data are currently available about the use of these drugs in daily clinical practice, particularly in relation to the appearance of side effects and interactions with other drugs, or their use in special populations or persons with the less common genotypes. This situation suggests the need for the generalised implementation of registries of patients receiving antiviral therapy. The main inconvenience of these new drugs is their high cost. This necessitates selection and prioritization of candidate patients to receive them, via strategies established by the various national organs, in accordance with the recommendations of scientific societies.

Treatment strategies for chronic hepatitis C prior to and following liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease is the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. However, HCV is an independent predictor of lower survival following LT, and recurrence of HCV post-LT is virtually universal. The historic standard of care during the interferon era of HCV therapy was expectant management-initiation of antiviral therapy in the setting of documented disease progression following LT. With the advent of new direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapies for HCV, the paradigm of expectant treatment for recurrent HCV infection post-LT is shifting. The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of DAAs, even among the sickest patients with advanced liver disease, enables treatment of HCV in the pre-transplant setting among LT waitlist registrants. Finally, emerging data are supportive of preemptive therapy with DAAs in liver transplant recipients as the preferred approach. Expectant management of HCV following LT can rarely be justified in the modern era of HCV therapy.

Tolerability and effectiveness of sofosbuvir and simeprevir in the post-transplant setting: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Outcome data on simeprevir and sofosbuvir (SMV+SOF) in patients with liver transplantation (LT) with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 (HCV-1) are limited with individual studies having a small sample size and limited SVR12 (sustained virological response) data. Our goal was to perform a meta-analysis to study the outcome of SMV+SOF±ribavirin (RBV) in recipients with LT.

METHODS

In April 2015, we conducted a literature search for 'simeprevir' in MEDLINE/EMBASE and five major liver meetings. We included studies with SVR12 data in ≥5 post-LT mono-infected HCV-1 patients treated with SMV+SOF±RBV. We used random-effects models to estimate effect sizes, and the Cochrane Q-test (p value <0.10) with I(2) (>50%) to assess study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included nine studies with a total of 325 patients with post-LT. Studies included mostly men (59-81%). Pooled SVR12 was 88.0% (95% CI 83.4% to 91.5%). In two studies, HCV-1a patients with mild fibrosis (n=108) had an SVR12 rate of 95.0% (95% CI 82.4% to 98.7%), which was significantly higher than that of HCV-1a patients with advanced fibrosis (n=49) with an SVR12 rate of 81.7% (95% CI 69.8% to 89.5%), OR 4.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 16.1, p=0.03). The most common pooled side effects were: fatigue 21% (n=48/237), headache 9% (n=23/254), dermatological symptoms 15% (n=38/254), and gastrointestinal symptoms 6% (12/193).

CONCLUSIONS

SMV+SOF±RBV is safe and effective in recipients with LT with HCV-1 infection.

Pros and Cons: Usage of organs from donors infected with hepatitis C virus - Revision in the direct-acting antiviral era

Should organs from hepatitis C antibody positive donors (HCVD+) be used for transplantation? Organ shortage forces transplant teams to use donors with extended criteria. The decision to transplant a HCVD+ graft is a balance between the risk of transmission of a virus that could lead to end-stage liver diseases and the benefit of access to transplantation, specifically in patients with life-threatening disease. The other issue is the impact of HCV-related liver fibrosis in the donor graft on the long-term outcome in the recipient. Thus, the use of HCVD+ demonstrated a shorter meantime on the waiting list in kidney transplantation. When a HCVD+ graft is transplanted, the risk of HCV transmission depends on; 1) the quality of screening of the donor; 2) the presence of viral replication in the donor at the time of transplantation and the ability to detect it; and 3) the HCV status of the recipient but also the type of transplanted organ. In liver transplantation, the use of HCVD+ graft is usually restricted to recipients with a chronic HCV infection. Several reports showed some competition between HCV donor and recipient strain without deleterious impact on graft and patient survival. Controversies are still pending regarding the quality of the graft and the progression of fibrosis. The recent approval of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) dramatically changes the landscape of HCV infection treatment. After transplantation, combinations of DAA show high efficacy and good safety profile. In the near future, extensive use of DAA should reduce the number of HCVD+ with a positive HCV RNA, limiting the risk of transmission but also the number of patients on waiting lists for a disease related to HCV.

News and challenges in the treatment of hepatitis C in liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main causes of end-stage liver disease and indications for liver transplantation (LT) worldwide. HCV infection always recurs on the graft in patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA, leading to cirrhosis in 20-30% within 5 years after transplantation. Achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) greatly improves patient and graft survival. Recently, the efficacy of therapy has radically changed and improved based on new direct acting antiviral agents (DAAs) without pegylated-interferon (PEG-IFN) and/or ribavirin (RBV), leading to SVR rates of more than 90% in transplanted patients. The safety profile in this population is also good, with limited drug-drug interactions. However, there are very few data on patients on the waiting list. Even when the results of combined DAAs are good (>80%), SVR rates are lower than in patients without cirrhosis. This review reports recent available data on the treatment of HCV infection in the transplant setting and discusses new dilemmas and challenges.

Interferon-free therapy for genotype 1 hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients: Real-world experience from the hepatitis C therapeutic registry and research network

Recurrent infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) after liver transplantation (LT) is associated with decreased graft and patient survival. Achieving sustained virological response (SVR) with antiviral therapy improves survival. Because interferon (IFN)-based therapy has limited efficacy and is poorly tolerated, there has been rapid transition to IFN-free direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens. This article describes the experience with DAAs in the treatment of posttransplant genotype (GT) 1 HCV from a consortium of community and academic centers (Hepatitis C Therapeutic Registry and Research Network [HCV-TARGET]). Twenty-one of the 54 centers contributing to the HCV-TARGET consortium participated in this study. Enrollment criteria included positive posttransplant HCV RNA before treatment, HCV GT 1, and documentation of use of a simeprevir (SMV)/sofosbuvir (SOF) containing DAA regimen. Safety and efficacy were assessed. SVR was defined as undetectable HCV RNA 64 days or later after cessation of treatment. A total of 162 patients enrolled in HCV-TARGET started treatment with SMV+SOF with or without ribavirin (RBV) following LT. The study population included 151 patients treated with these regimens for whom outcomes and safety data were available. The majority of the 151 patients were treated with SOF and SMV alone (n = 119; 79%) or with RBV (n = 32; 21%), The duration of therapy was 12 weeks for most patients, although 15 patients received 24 weeks of treatment. Of all patients receiving SOF/SMV with or without RBV, 133/151 (88%) achieved sustained virological response at 12 weeks after therapy and 11 relapsed (7%). One patient had virological breakthrough (n = 1), and 6 patients were lost to posttreatment follow-up. Serious adverse events occurred in 11.9%; 3 patients (all cirrhotic) died due to aspiration pneumonia, suicide, and multiorgan failure. One experienced LT rejection. IFN-free DAA treatment represents a major improvement over prior IFN-based therapy. Broader application of these and other emerging DAA regimens in the treatment of posttransplant hepatitis C is warranted.

Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in the Era of Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents

There is paucity of literature regarding hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients. In the study described herein we evaluated several aspects of HCV infection in HCT recipients, including the impact of this infection on cancer status, liver-related outcomes, mortality, and the role of antiviral treatment (AVT), including direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). The medical records of HCV-infected allogeneic and autologous HCT recipients, seen at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from August 2009 to November 2015, were reviewed. Patients seen from August 1, 2009 to October 30, 2012 were reviewed retrospectively, whereas those seen from November 1, 2012 to November 30, 2015 were analyzed prospectively in an observational study. Of 434 HCV-infected cancer patients evaluated, 64 underwent 69 HCTs. Most (78%) underwent autologous transplantation. Thirteen percent of patients became HCV-seronegative post-HCT. Compared with patients who did not receive AVT, treated patients had fewer relapses of HCV-associated non-Hodgkin lymphomas (20% versus 86%; P = .015), higher 5-year survival rates (75% versus 39%; P = .02), and a trend toward lower rate of progression to cirrhosis (5% versus 21%; P = .06). AVT discontinuation rate post-HCT was 71% in those receiving IFN-containing regimens and 0% in those receiving DAAs (P < .01). AVT was effective in 12 of 37 patients (32%) and 11 of 13 patients (85%) receiving IFN-based and DAA regimens, respectively (P = .003). HCV is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in this population. HCV seropositivity can be lost post-HCT, posing a diagnostic challenge. Treatment of HCV infection in HCT recipients improves both oncologic and hepatic outcomes. These patients can be successfully treated with DAAs.

Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C in Special Populations

The management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in special populations is challenging. The efficacy and safety data of the currently approved all-oral direct-acting antiviral combinations, including sofosbuvir, ledipasvir, daclatasvir, paritaprevir/ritonavir/ombitasvir plus dasabuvir (3D), and ribavirin, is compelling for use in special HCV populations, as has recently been recommended by expert guidelines. The treatment regimens and sustained virological response rates for special populations are nearly similar to those of the general HCV population. Sofosbuvir is not recommended in patients with severe renal impairment, and simeprevir and 3D regimen are not recommended for those with decompensated liver disease.

Timing of Antiviral Therapy in Candidates for Liver Transplant for Hepatitis C and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Hepatitis C virus infection is the most common underlying reason for hepatocellular carcinoma and indication for liver transplant. The increased availability of non-interferon-based therapy has expanded the number of treatment-eligible patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a decision analysis model to compare 2 strategies of treating hepatitis C virus. Included patients were followed for 1 year after liver transplant. The probabilities and costs were obtained from a literature review, an expert panel, and our institution's experience. Sensitivity analyses were performed on all variables.

RESULTS

Our model demonstrated that it would be less costly to treat patients after liver transplant than to treat patients while they wait for transplant. When we compared baseline values, the cost difference between the 2 strategies was $25,011 per patient and $41,535 per sustained viral response. Overall survival was 60.1% for both strategies. Our model was robust across most of the variables tested in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicated that there is no substantial pharmacoeconomic or survival advantage of treating hepatitis C virus in patients with compensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplant versus after transplant.

The discovery of sofosbuvir: a revolution for therapy of chronic hepatitis C

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a worldwide health problem, whose management has been revolutionized after the availability of sofosbuvir, a direct-acting antiviral (DAAs). Sofosbuvir is a HCV NS5B polymerase inhibitor. Antiviral regimens including sofosbuvir are associated with success rates >90%, even in the case of "difficult-to-treat" patients such as subjects with liver cirrhosis as well as prior null response to IFN and ribavirin.

AREAS COVERED

This drug discovery case history focuses on the pre-clinical and clinical development of sofosbuvir. The authors analyze all of the main steps leading to the global approval of sofosbuvir. The paper also highlights the encouraging data from the subsequent trials wherein sofosbuvir was tested in combination with other DAAs (IFN- and often ribavirin-free regimens) and from first real life studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Sofosbuvir is a very powerful weapon in the new armamentarium against HCV. Thanks to its valuable features including its pangenotypic activity, once-daily oral administration, its excellent tolerability, and safety profile, it represents the backbone of several effective regimens, in combination with IFN or with other DAAs (IFN-free therapies). Regimens including sofosbuvir have quickly become the touchstone for all the novel anti-HCV treatments.

Current Management of Hepatitis C Virus: Regimens for Peri-Liver Transplant Patients

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection currently remains the leading indication for liver transplant in the United States. However, recurrent HCV infection after transplant is universal in those who enter transplant with viremia resulting in reduced posttransplant graft and patient survival rates, caused in large part by progressive recurrent HCV disease. Therefore, successful treatment of HCV in the peri-transplant period, either before or after transplant, is paramount in ensuring improved posttransplant outcomes. This article reviews the experience to date treating HCV in wait-listed patients and liver transplant recipients and the unique challenges encountered when treating this population.

Hepatitis C virus treatment in the real world: optimising treatment and access to therapies

Chronic HCV infections represent a major worldwide public health problem and are responsible for a large proportion of liver related deaths, mostly because of HCV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis. The treatment of HCV has undergone a rapid and spectacular revolution. In the past 5 years, the launch of direct acting antiviral drugs has seen sustained virological response rates reach 90% and above for many patient groups. The new treatments are effective, well tolerated, allow for shorter treatment regimens and offer new opportunities for previously excluded groups. This therapeutic revolution has changed the rules for treatment of HCV, moving the field towards an interferon-free era and raising the prospect of HCV eradication. This manuscript addresses the new challenges regarding treatment optimisation in the real world, improvement of antiviral efficacy in 'hard-to-treat' groups, the management of patients whose direct acting antiviral drug treatment was unsuccessful, and access to diagnosis and treatment in different parts of the world.

Keys to long-term care of the liver transplant recipient

Improvements in overall survival early after liver transplantation result in a growing number of patients with the potential for long-term survival. Data available on long-term survival, to date, reflect the situation of patients who received their liver transplant during a very different health-care era. Translating these data into the current medical era of liver transplantation is an important task, as a better understanding of aspects associated with morbidity and mortality is fundamental in improving the long-term outcome of liver transplant recipients. Malignancy screening, optimal treatment of recurrent disease and adequate management of metabolic disease are crucial contributions to advance patient care. In this Review, data specific to the liver transplant recipient will be evaluated and, in the absence of sufficient evidence at this time, recommendations and guidelines for the general population on management of long-term concerns will be assessed for their applicability after liver transplantation. In addition, other preventive strategies relating to pregnancy, contraception and vaccination are reviewed in detail.

Sofosbuvir and simeprevir is effective for recurrent hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LT). Recurrent infection is universal and can lead to progressive liver disease. Widespread use of interferon-based therapy has been limited by intolerability and adverse effects.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of sofosbuvir and simeprevir in the treatment of recurrent hepatitis C in adult (age >18) LT recipients.

RESULTS

Seventy-six percent of the recipients were male and the mean age [±standard deviation (SD)] was 61 (±6.0) years. The mean time (±SD) from LT to treatment initiation was 71.8 (±77.1) months. Of the 26 patients with viral levels measured 4 weeks after starting antiviral therapy, 58% were undetectable. At the end of therapy, viral load was undetectable in all transplant recipients. The 12 week sustained viral response (SVR) was 93%. All recipients were able to complete therapy and no patients required growth factors of blood product transfusion during treatment. No patient required drug interruption of their immunosuppressant therapy.

CONCLUSION

The use of sofosbuvir and simeprevir is efficacious, safe, and tolerable and should be considered in LT recipients with recurrent HCV who are candidates for antiviral therapy.

Efficacy of Sofosbuvir and Daclatasvir in Patients With Fibrosing Cholestatic Hepatitis C After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) is a life-threatening disorder that develops in patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after liver transplantation. Until recently, therapeutic options have been limited. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir- and daclatasvir-based regimens.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 23 patients with FCH who participated in a prospective cohort study in France and Belgium of the effects of antiviral agents in patients with recurrence of HCV infection after liver transplantation, from October 2013 through April 2014. Most of the patients had genotype 1 infections that had not responded to previous treatment; 4 patients also were infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Eight patients (37%) had ascites and 15 patients (65%) had bilirubin levels greater than 100 mmol/L; their median serum level of HCV RNA was 7 log IU/mL. The median time between transplantation and treatment initiation was 5 months. Subjects were given either sofosbuvir and daclatasvir (n = 15) or sofosbuvir and ribavirin (n = 8) for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was complete clinical response (survival without re-transplantation, bilirubin level <34 μmol/L, and no ascites or hepatic encephalopathy 36 weeks after treatment began).

RESULTS

All patients survived, without re-transplantation, until week 36. Rapid and dramatic improvements in clinical status were observed. The patients' median bilirubin concentration decreased from 122 μmol/L at baseline to a normal value at week 12 of treatment. Twenty-two patients (96%) had a complete clinical response at week 36. Despite the low rate of rapid virologic response, 22 patients (96%) achieved a sustained virologic response at week 12. The only relapse of HCV infection occurred in a patient with human immunodeficiency virus infection who received sofosbuvir and ribavirin. Tolerance was satisfactory, with no grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to sofosbuvir or daclatasvir and no significant interactions among drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Sofosbuvir therapy with daclatasvir or ribavirin leads to major clinical improvement and high rates of sustained virologic response at week 12 in most patients with recurrence of HCV infection and FCH after liver transplantation. ClinicalTrial.gov no: NCT01944527.

Era of direct acting antivirals in chronic hepatitis C: Who will benefit?

In the era of highly effective direct acting antiviral (DAA) drugs for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) infection, where eradication is almost ensured with minimal side effects, all hepatitis C carriers should benefit theoretically. In the real world setting however, only a small proportion will benefit at this time point due to the multiple barriers to accessing therapy. Given that universal treatment is unlikely, treatment with DAAs will likely be restricted to those with the highest health benefits, and for those who can afford the high expense of a treatment course. Those with the highest unmet needs include those who have failed previous interferon-based therapy or who are interferon-ineligible with evidence of active disease, those with advance liver disease, and those with recurrence of hepatitis C after liver transplantation. In the future, the focus should be on increasing access to treatment for those infected with CHC.

Impact of new treatment options for hepatitis C virus infection in liver transplantation

Liver transplant candidates and recipients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease greatly benefit from an effective antiviral therapy. The achievement of a sustained virological response before transplantation can prevent the recurrence of post-transplant HCV disease that occurs universally and correlates with enhanced progression to graft cirrhosis. Previous standard-of-care regimens (e.g., pegylated-interferon plus ribavirin with or without first generation protease inhibitors, boceprevir and telaprevir) displayed suboptimal results and poor tolerance in liver transplant recipients. A new class of potent direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) characterized by all-oral regimens with minimal side effects has been approved and included in the recent guidelines for the treatment of liver transplant recipients with recurrent HCV disease. Association of sofosbuvir with ribavirin and/or ledipasvir is recommended in liver transplant recipients and patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Other regimens include simeprevir, daclatasvir, and combination of other DAA. Possible interactions should be monitored, especially in coinfected human immunodeficiency virus/HCV patients receiving antiretrovirals.

HCV targeting of patients with cirrhosis

Interferon (IFN)-free treatments are now the treatment of choice for patients with chronic hepatitis C. Previously difficult to treat patients by IFN-containing treatments can now be treated safely by IFN-free therapies. More than 90% of hepatitis C genotype 1 and 4 patients with compensated cirrhosis or after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be cured by sofosbuvir combined with simeprevir, daclatasvir or ledipasvir, or by the paritaprevir/ritona-vir/ombitasvir/±dasabuvir (3D) combination. Addition of ribavirin confers to a minimal, if any, benefit to increase SVR. The need for ribavirin is controversial and remains to be studied. The optimal length of treatment is still unknown, and an individual approach may be needed. Most patients require only 12weeks of therapy. The safety of these drugs is not fully explored in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh C), who should not be treated with protease inhibitors. In cirrhosis hepatitis C virus eradication does not necessarily mean a cure of the disease and patients regularly require follow-up. Drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressant in patients after OLT are easier to manage but still require attention. Better drugs are needed for genotype 3 patients.

Prednisolone does not affect direct-acting antivirals against hepatitis C, but inhibits interferon-alpha production by plasmacytoid dendritic cells

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection compromises long-term outcomes of liver transplantation. Although glucocorticosteroid-based immunosuppression is commonly used, discussion is ongoing on the effect of prednisolone (Pred) on HCV recurrence and response to antiviral therapy post transplantation. Recently, new drugs (direct-acting antivirals) have been approved for the treatment of HCV, however, it remains unknown whether their antiviral activity is affected by Pred. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of Pred on the antiviral activity of asunaprevir (Asu), daclatasvir (Dac), ribavirin (RBV), and interferon-alpha (IFN-α), and on plasmacytoid dendritic cells (PDCs), the main IFN-α-producing immune cells.

METHODS

The effects of Pred and antiviral compounds were tested in both a subgenomic and infectious HCV replication model. Furthermore, effects were tested on human PDCs stimulated with a Toll-like receptor-7 ligand.

RESULT

Pred did not directly affect HCV replication and did not inhibit the antiviral action of Asu, Dac, RBV, or IFN-α. Stimulated PDCs potently suppressed HCV replication. This suppression was reversed by treating PDCs with Pred. Pred significantly decreased IFN-α production by PDCs without affecting cell viability. When Asu and Dac were combined with PDCs, a significant cooperative antiviral effect was observed.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that Pred acts on the antiviral function of PDCs. Pred does not affect the antiviral action of Asu, Dac, RBV, or IFN-α. This implies that there is no contraindication to combine antiviral therapies with Pred in the post-transplantation management of HCV recurrence.

Interferon-Free Hepatitis C Treatment before and after Liver Transplantation: The Role of HCV Drug Resistance

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the main indication for liver transplantation (LT) in most countries. All patients who undergo LT with detectable serum HCV RNA experience graft reinfection progressing to cirrhosis within five years in 20% to 30% of them. Obtaining a sustained virological response (SVR) greatly improves overall and graft survival. Until 2011, standard antiviral therapy using PEGylated interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) was the only effective therapy, with an SVR rate around 30% in this setting. For patients infected with genotype 1, first generation NS3/4A protease inhibitors (PIs), boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR), associated with PEG-IFN and RBV for 48 weeks have increased the SVR rates to 60% in non-transplant patients. However, tolerability and drug-drug interactions with calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) are both limiting factors of their use in the liver transplant setting. Over recent years, the efficacy of antiviral C therapy has improved dramatically using new direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents without PEG-IFN and/or RBV, leading to SVR rates over 90% in non-transplant patients. Results available for transplant patients showed a better efficacy and tolerability and less drug-drug interactions than with first wave PIs. However, some infrequent cases of viral resistance have been reported using PIs or NS5A inhibitors pre- or post-LT that can lead to difficulties in the management of these patients.

Multicenter Experience with Boceprevir or Telaprevir to Treat Hepatitis C Recurrence after Liver Transplantation: When Present Becomes Past, What Lessons for Future?

Background and aims

First generation protease inhibitors (PI) with peg-interferon (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) have been the only therapy available for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection in most countries for 3 years. We have investigated the efficacy and tolerance of this triple therapy in transplanted patients experiencing a recurrence of HCV infection on the liver graft.

Patients

This cohort study enrolled 81 liver transplant patients (Male: 76%, mean age: 55.8±9.7 years) with severe HCV recurrence (F3 or F4: n = 34 (42%), treatment experienced: n = 44 (54%)), treated with boceprevir (n = 36; 44%) or telaprevir (n = 45; 56%). We assessed the percentages of patients with sustained virological responses 24 weeks after therapy (SVR24), and safety.

Results

The SVR24 rate was 47% (telaprevir: 42%; boceprevir: 53%, P = ns). At baseline, a normal bilirubin level (p = 0.0145) and albumin level >35g/L (p = 0.0372) and an initial RBV dosage of ≥800 mg/day (p = 0.0033) predicted SVR24. During treatment, achieving an early virological response after 12 weeks was the strongest independent factor to predict SVR24 (p<0.0001). A premature discontinuation of anti-HCV therapy due to a serious adverse event (SAE) was observed in 22 patients (27%). Hematological toxicity, infections and deaths were observed in 95%, 28% and 7% of patients, respectively. A history of post-LT antiviral therapy and thrombocytopenia (<50G/L) during treatment were both independent predictors of the occurrence of infections or SAE (p = 0.0169 and p = 0.011).

Conclusions

The use of first generation PI after liver transplantation enabled an SVR24 rate of 47% in genotype 1 patients, but induced a high rate of SAE. The identification of predictive factors for a response to treatment, and the occurrence of SAE, have enabled us to establish limits for the use of this anti-HCV therapy in the transplant setting.

Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) Guidance for Antiviral Therapy Against HCV Infection in 2015

Overall prevalence of HCV infection in India has been estimated to be approximately 1.3% in the general population. Recent introduction of sofosbuvir in India at a relatively affordable price has led to great optimism about prospects of cure for these patients. This drug is likely to form the backbone of current and future treatment regimes for HCV infection, displacing pegylated interferon. Availability of directly acting antiviral drugs (DAAs) has necessitated revision of INASL guidelines for the treatment of HCV published in 2014, as has happened across the world. Current considerations for the treatment of HCV in India include the poorer response of genotype 3, nonavailability of many of the DAAs recommended by other guidelines and the cost of therapy. Since only one DAA, sofosbuvir, is available in India, only two sofosbuvir-based regimes are possible: either dual drug therapy in combination with ribavirin alone for 6 months or triple drug therapy in combination with ribavirin and pegylated interferon for 3 months. The utility of these regimes in various situations has been discussed. Availability of a few other newer DAAs, expected in 2016, is expected to lead to more widespread use of these agents. Current guidance will be updated once newer DAAs, newer evidence with DAAs and 'real-life experience' with use of DAAs accumulate in India.

Safety and Efficacy of Simeprevir/Sofosbuvir in Hepatitis C-Infected Patients With Compensated and Decompensated Cirrhosis

Risks and benefits of simeprevir plus sofosbuvir (SIM+SOF) in patients with advanced cirrhosis are unknown. We assessed the safety and sustained virological responses (SVR) of SIM+SOF with and without ribavirin (RBV) in patients with Child-Pugh (CP)-B/C versus CP-A cirrhosis and compared to matched untreated controls. This study was of a multicenter cohort of adults with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 and cirrhosis treated with SIM+SOF with/without RBV for 12 weeks. Controls were matched on treatment center, age, CP class, and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Of 160 patients treated with SIM+SOF with/without RBV, 35% had CP-B/C and 64% had CP-A, with median baseline MELD 9 (interquartile range, 8-11). Sustained virological response at week 12 (SVR12) was achieved by 73% of CP-B/C versus 91% of CP-A (P < 0.01). CP-B/C versus CP-A had more early treatment discontinuations (11% vs. 1%), adverse events (AEs) requiring hospitalization (22% vs. 2%), infections requiring antibiotics (20% vs. 1%), and hepatic decompensating events (20% vs. 3%; all P < 0.01). There were 2 deaths: 1 CP-B/C (liver related) and 1 CP-A (not liver related). In multivariate analysis, CP-B/C independently predicted lack of SVR12 (odds ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval: 0.08-0.92). In comparing SIM+SOF-treated patients versus matched untreated controls, AEs requiring hospitalization (9% vs. 13%; P = 0.55), infections (8% vs. 6%; P = 0.47), and events of decompensation (9% vs. 10%; P = 0.78) occurred at similar frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

SIM+SOF with/without RBV has lower efficacy and higher rates of AEs in patients with CP-B/C cirrhosis, compared to CP-A. Frequency of adverse safety outcomes were similar to matched untreated controls, suggesting that safety events reflect the natural history of cirrhosis and are not related to treatment.

Management of HCV in the liver transplant setting

Hepatitis C-related cirrhosis is the main indication for liver transplantation. In the absence of viral eradication, viral recurrence leads to recurrent HCV disease and progression to advanced graft disease in many recipients, particularly those transplanted with subobtimal grafts. Viral eradication is associated with improved outcome whether used pre- or post-transplantation. In the new era of interferon-free regimes, this is now safe and feasible in most transplant candidates and transplant recipients. There are questions that remain unanswered, such as defining the point of no return where clinical improvement does not follow viral eradication or management of treatment failures.

Ledipasvir and Sofosbuvir Plus Ribavirin for Treatment of HCV Infection in Patients With Advanced Liver Disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are no effective and safe treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection of patients who have advanced liver disease.

METHODS

In this phase 2, open-label study, we assessed treatment with the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir, the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir, and ribavirin in patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 or 4. Cohort A enrolled patients with cirrhosis and moderate or severe hepatic impairment who had not undergone liver transplantation. Cohort B enrolled patients who had undergone liver transplantation: those without cirrhosis; those with cirrhosis and mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment; and those with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1) to receive 12 or 24 weeks of a fixed-dose combination tablet containing ledipasvir and sofosbuvir, once daily, plus ribavirin. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12).

RESULTS

We enrolled 337 patients, 332 (99%) with HCV genotype 1 infection and 5 (1%) with HCV genotype 4 infection. In cohort A (nontransplant), SVR12 was achieved by 86%-89% of patients. In cohort B (transplant recipients), SVR12 was achieved by 96%-98% of patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis, by 85%-88% of patients with moderate hepatic impairment, by 60%-75% of patients with severe hepatic impairment, and by all 6 patients with fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Response rates in the 12- and 24-week groups were similar. Thirteen patients (4%) discontinued the ledipasvir and sofosbuvir combination prematurely because of adverse events; 10 patients died, mainly from complications related to hepatic decompensation.

CONCLUSION

The combination of ledipasvir, sofosbuvir, and ribavirin for 12 weeks produced high rates of SVR12 in patients with advanced liver disease, including those with decompensated cirrhosis before and after liver transplantation. ClinTrials.gov: NCT01938430.

Interferon-free therapy for hepatitis C: The hurdles amid a golden era

The long awaited all-oral therapy for hepatitis C virus infection has officially been inaugurated by the registration of the hepatitis C nucleotide inhibitor sofosbuvir in a combination regimen with ribavirin. More recently, the oral array to treat hepatitis C has been enriched by the arrival of the NS5A inhibitors ledipasvir (also in a single formulation with sofosbuvir, Harvoni(®)) and daclatasvir; the protease inhibitor simeprevir, and the Viekirax(®)+Exviera™ regimen based on the ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor paritaprevir; the NS5A inhibitor ombitasvir, and the non-nucleoside inhibitor dasabuvir. Owing to the budget-breaking price of the newer oral medicines, the Italian National Health System elected to restrict reimbursement of oral anti-hepatitis C therapy to patients with advanced liver disease or transplanted organs, and those who are interferon unable, only. While this therapeutic strategy harmonizes with principles of distributive justice, at the same time it fuelled the argument of its doubtful cost-effectiveness, owing to the National Health System's reimbursement of the sole sofosbuvir+ribavirin regimen, which has suboptimal efficacy against the prevalent hepatitis C virus genotype 1b. As a consequence, we are left with a number of uncertainties regarding the optimal treatment modality for certain subgroups of hepatitis C patients, and the clinical benefits provided by hepatitis C virus clearance in patients with advanced liver disease.

Liver transplantation in the context of organ shortage: toward extension and restriction of indications considering recent clinical data and ethical framework

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The scarcity of liver grafts requires to optimize the results of transplantation. Extensions and alternatives of liver transplantation have to be regularly evaluated.

RECENT FINDINGS

Acute-on-chronic liver failure and severe alcoholic hepatitis may represent potential extensions of transplant indications. In these diseases, selected patients could obtain a significant benefit from liver transplantation, whereas long-term outcomes and global impact on waiting lists remain to be evaluated prospectively. Alternatives to transplantation may be represented by recent progress in the management of hepatitis C and the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. In hepatitis C, new drug combinations may improve the disease control, reducing the progression to cirrhosis and also the risk of post-transplant reinfection allowing to anticipate a future decrease in the indications for transplantation and retransplantation in these patients. In hepatocellular carcinoma, thanks to improvements in operative techniques and better identification of prognostic factors of cancer recurrency, surgical resection or radiofrequency destruction could appear now as true alternatives to transplant in highly selected patients.

SUMMARY

Before implementation of these potential changes into decisional algorithms for listing and organ allocation, their consequences, either for patient's individual benefit or for global transplant outcomes, should be closely evaluated using objective long-term end points and taking into account the ethical recommendations for organ transplantation.

Treating fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis C with sofosbuvir and ribavirin: a matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) is an uncommon but potentially fatal complication of recurrent hepatitis C (HCV) in liver transplant recipients.

METHODS

We matched the treatment outcomes of 10 liver transplant recipients who developed FCH with those of 10 recipients with recurrent HCV without FCH treated with sofosbuvir and ribavirin.

RESULTS

Baseline mean alanine transaminase, aspartate transaminase, alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin were 186 U/L, 197 U/L, 243 U/L, and 6.7 mg/dL, respectively, in the FCH recipients and 82 U/L, 60 U/L, 110 U/L, and 0.99 mg/dL, respectively, in non-FCH recipients. The sustained viral response in FCH and non-FCH recipients was 40% and 80%, respectively. One-yr patient and graft survival rates were 90% and 80%, respectively, in FCH recipients, and 100% in non-FCH recipients. Seven FCH and six non-FCH recipients were treated for anemia with blood transfusion and/or erythropoietin growth factors.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the use of sofosbuvir and ribavirin is effective and tolerable in liver transplant recipients treated for recurrent FCH. There is a trend of lower sustained viral response, patient survival, and graft survival in the FCH recipients.

Hepatitis C virus-HIV-coinfected patients and liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the experience to date and unique challenges associated with liver transplantation in hepatitis C virus (HCV)/HIV-coinfected patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The prevalence of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma is rising among HIV-infected individuals. With careful patient selection and in the absence of HCV infection, HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected liver transplant recipients have comparable posttransplant outcomes. However, in the presence of HCV infection, patient and graft survival are significantly poorer in HIV-infected recipients, who have a higher risk of aggressive HCV recurrence, acute rejection, sepsis, and multiorgan failure. Outcomes may be improved with careful recipient and donor selection and with the availability of new highly potent all-oral HCV direct acting antivirals (DAAs). Although all-oral DAAs have not been evaluated in HIV/HCV-coinfected transplant patients, HIV does not adversely impact treatment success in nontransplant populations. Therefore, there is great hope that HCV can be successful eradicated in HIV/HCV-coinfected transplant patients and will result in improved outcomes. Careful attention to drug-drug interactions with HIV antiretroviral agents, DAAs, and posttransplant immunosuppressants is required.

SUMMARY

Liver transplant outcomes are poorer in HIV/HCV-coinfected recipients compared with those with HCV-monoinfection. The new HCV DAAs offer tremendous potential to improve outcomes in this challenging population.

New hepatitis C virus therapies: drug classes and metabolism, drug interactions relevant in the transplant settings, drug options in decompensated cirrhosis, and drug options in end-stage renal disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article will review the new direct acting antiviral agent (DAA) drug classes for the treatment of hepatitis C, how they are combined and the relevant drug-drug interactions in the postliver transplant setting. Treatment options for chronic hepatitis C in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and end-stage renal disease will also be discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

The availability of new drug classes has increased the treatment options in patients with hepatitis C in the post-transplant settings. Clinical trials have concluded that sofosbuvir (SOF) with ledipasvir (LDV) may be safely administered with calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus, cyclosporine) and rapamycin inhibitors (sirolimus, everolimus). Similarly, paritaprevir/ritonavir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir may be administered with tacrolimus and cyclosporine though appropriate dose adjustments must be made to the calcineurin inhibitors. In those with decompensated Childs B/C cirrhosis, SOF, SOF and LDV, as well as daclatasvir may be given without dose adjustment. In renal impairment, all DAAs may be used safely down to a glomerular filteration rate (GFR) of 30 ml/min. Simeprevir, paritaprevir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir may be given for those down to GFR of 15 ml/min. Finally, daclatasvir may be given without dose administration change.

SUMMARY

In summary, DAAs have better tolerability and greater efficacy than interferon-based therapy post-transplant. Drug-drug interactions must be carefully assessed when these newer agents are used for therapy in the postliver transplant settings. Thus far, dose adjustments for DAAs have not been required in chronic kidney disease though data are incomplete in those with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) or on dialysis. Hepatitis C treatment in those with decompensated cirrhosis results in impaired hepatic metabolism that may affect DAA levels, and clinicians should carefully choose treatment options for Childs B and C cirrhotic patients.

Reappraisal of the hepatitis C virus-positive donor in solid organ transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donor allografts may be considered for HCV-positive recipients, but are underutilized. With new effective antiviral treatments, we aim to review data on the use of HCV-positive allografts in solid organ transplantation and place them in the context of the changing HCV landscape.

RECENT FINDINGS

Hepatitis C is the most common indication for liver transplant in the USA and Europe and a significant comorbidity in patients on the waitlist for nonliver solid organ transplantation. Patients with HCV on the waitlist for nonliver solid organ transplantation have worse outcomes compared with those without HCV. However, survival after transplantation is improved compared with those who remain on the waitlist. There has been concern that use of HCV-positive allografts would lead to worse post-transplant outcomes. However, more recent data suggest that transplant outcomes for recipients who accept HCV-positive donor allografts may be comparable with those who receive HCV-negative allografts. Emerging treatments to eradicate HCV have further improved the course of HCV-positive individuals, with improved efficacy and reduced side-effects.

SUMMARY

In view of the changing landscape of hepatitis C treatment and reduced wait time on the transplant waiting lists for those accepting HCV-positive donors, future use of select HCV-positive donors in solid organ transplantation should be encouraged.

Advances in hepatitis C therapies

INTRODUCTION

The recent development of new direct acting antivirals constitutes a clinical revolution in the field of hepatitis C therapy. Different drugs with direct antiviral effects and very high potency have been developed, changing the current scenario and prognosis of hepatitis C-related liver disease. This review aims to clarify the current stage of the different antiviral strategies in patients with chronic hepatitis C infection by analyzing the specific efficacy of each combination.

AREAS COVERED

Data have been extracted from the most important published clinical trials, cumulative real-world experience reports and data from the most relevant studies presented in the last international meetings (European and American International Liver Congresses). In addition, data from the recently updated international guidelines have also been included.

EXPERT OPINION

Although there are many differences in health-care budgets among countries in the world which will surely compromise drug availability and treatment decisions, this review aims to give a general and brief recommendation to help treating physicians to choose the best option to treat hepatitis C.

Boceprevir-Based Triple Antiviral Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Kidney-Transplant Candidates

Background. There are few data on the combination of (pegylated-) interferon- (Peg-IFN-) α, ribavirin, and first-generation direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Our aim was to describe the efficacy and safety of Peg-IFN-α, ribavirin, and boceprevir in hemodialysis patients. Patients. Six hemodialysis patients, chronically infected by genotype-1 HCV, were given Peg-IFN-α (135 µg/week), ribavirin (200 mg/d), and boceprevir (2400 mg/d) for 48 weeks. Results. At initiation of antiviral therapy, median viral concentration was 5.68 (3.78–6.55) log IU/mL. HCV RNA was undetectable in four of the six patients at week 4 and in all patients at week 24. A breakthrough was observed in two patients between weeks 24 and 48, and a third patient stopped antiviral therapy between weeks 24 and 48 because of severe peripheral neuropathy. At week 48, HCV RNA was undetectable in three patients. Of these, two patients relapsed within a month after antiviral therapy was stopped. Hence, only one patient had a sustained virological response; he was a previous partial responder. Overall, anemia was the main side effect. Conclusion. A triple antiviral therapy based on Peg-IFN-α, ribavirin, and boceprevir is not optimal at treating hemodialysis patients with chronic HCV infection. Studies using new-generation drugs are required in this setting.

Antiviral Therapy in Patients with Hepatitis C Virus-Induced Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Opportunities to treat infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) are evolving rapidly. From the introduction of interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy in the early 1990s to the approval of telaprevir- and boceprevir-based triple therapies with pegylated (PEG)-IFN-α and ribavirin (RBV) in 2011, the chances of curing patients infected with HCV genotype 1 have improved dramatically to reach approximately 70%. Significant further improvements that may cure virtually all HCV patients with an all-oral, IFN-free regimen are becoming progressively available. Key Messages: Historically, a PEG-IFN/RBV combination therapy of patients with liver cirrhosis was associated with lower virological rates and a worse safety profile. The advent of the first protease inhibitor-based triple therapy was long expected, but the promise fell rapidly because of the numerous side effects and the requirement for intensive clinical management in cirrhotic patients. The newer direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) target the viral polymerase with either nucleos(t)ide analogues or nonnucleosidic inhibitors, the viral protease and the viral NS5A protein. Several clinical trials have now shown that a combination of sofosbuvir (nucleosidic polymerase inhibitor) with daclatasvir or ledipasvir (NS5A inhibitors), or sofosbuvir with simeprevir (protease inhibitor), or a combination of ABT-450 (protease inhibitor) with ritonavir (ABT-450/r), the nonnucleosidic polymerase inhibitor ABT-333 and the NS5A inhibitor ABT-267, can achieve a sustained virological response in up to 95% of naive patients or previously treated patients, even in those who failed prior treatment with first-generation protease inhibitors. The best treatment regimens enable the achievement of comparable results even in cirrhotics, while other regimens still require RBV or a longer treatment duration to achieve optimal results. This improved risk/benefit ratio justifies early access programs of IFN-free regimens for cirrhotic patients. The remaining difficult-to-treat patients are cirrhotics infected with HCV genotype 3 and those with decompensated cirrhosis, for whom novel DAA combinations should be evaluated in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

As new DAAs are becoming available in early access treatment programs, treatment strategy studies are being performed to optimize treatment regimens with respect to the choice of DAAs and treatment duration, based on viral genotypes, prior treatment response and the presence of liver cirrhosis. In the near future, this should allow: (i) a decrease in the complications of HCV-induced cirrhosis, (ii) liver transplantations to be performed in virally cured patients, and (iii) the rescue of patients in the worst clinical situation (decompensated cirrhosis and HCV recurrence on liver graft).

Sofosbuvir and Simeprevir Therapy for Recurrent Hepatitis C Infection After Liver Transplantation

Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients has been associated with low efficacy, poor tolerability, and drug-drug interactions. Recent approval of various hepatitis C direct-acting antivirals has resulted in improvement of these parameters. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of 12 week all-oral interferon- and ribavirin-free therapy with sofosbuvir and simeprevir.

METHODS

Thirty-two genotype 1 liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C infection were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received 12 weeks of sofosbuvir 400 mg and simeprevir 150 mg orally daily. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

Sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment was achieved in 30 of 32 (94%; 95% confidence interval, 79-99%) patients. All patients enjoyed on-treatment virological response. Both patients who relapsed were cirrhotic, previously treated with Q80K polymorphism. Significant improvements in alkaline phosphatase, albumin, alanine aminotransferase levels, and platelets were seen at 12-week post therapy. Treatment was well tolerated. No grade 3 or 4 adverse events were noted. Headache and fatigue were the most common complaints.

CONCLUSION

Combination of sofosbuvir and simeprevir for 12 weeks resulted in 94% sustained virological response-12 rates in patients with hepatitis C genotype 1 and was well tolerated.

Predictive factors associated with hepatitis C antiviral therapy response

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection may lead to significant liver injury, and viral, environmental, host, immunologic and genetic factors may contribute to the differences in the disease expression and treatment response. In the early 2000s, dual therapy using a combination of pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (PR) became the standard of care for HCV treatment. In this PR era, predictive factors of therapy response related to virus and host have been identified. In 2010/2011, therapeutic regimens for HCV genotype 1 patients were modified, and the addition of NS3/4a protease inhibitors (boceprevir or telaprevir) to dual therapy increased the effectiveness and chances of sustained virologic response (SVR). Nevertheless, the first-generation triple therapy is associated with many adverse events, some of which are serious and associated with death, particularly in cirrhotic patients. This led to the need to identify viral and host predictive factors that might influence the SVR rate to triple therapy and avoid unnecessary exposure to these drugs. Over the past four years, hepatitis C treatment has been rapidly changing with the development of new therapies and other developments. Currently, with the more recent generations of pangenotipic antiviral therapies, there have been higher sustained virologic rates, and prognostic factors may not have the same importance and strength as before. Nonetheless, some variables may still be consistent with the low rates of non-response with regimens that include sofosbuvir, daclatasvir and ledipasvir. In this manuscript, we review the predictive factors of therapy response across the different treatment regimens over the last decade including the new antiviral drugs.

Beyond the NIH Multicenter HIV Transplant Trial Experience: Outcomes of HIV+ Liver Transplant Recipients Compared to HCV+ or HIV+/HCV+ Coinfected Recipients in the United States

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of liver transplant (LT) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfected recipients in the United States is unknown. We investigated (i) the effect of HIV on US patient and allograft LT outcomes, compared to HCV+ and HIV/HCV uninfected recipients and (ii) whether LT at centers that participated in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Solid Organ Transplantation in HIV Trial, reflecting experience and a standardized approach to patient selection, impacted outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of primary LT recipients transplanted 27 February 2002 through 31 December 2013, categorized by serostatus: HCV+ (n = 20 829), HIV+ (n = 72), HIV+/HCV+ (n = 160), and HIV-/HCV- uninfected (n = 22 926) as reference. Survival was determined using Cox regression, stratified according to center NIH trial participation.

RESULTS

HCV (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-1.52) and HIV/HCV coinfection (HR 2.62, 95% CI, 2.06-3.33) were associated with mortality; HIV monoinfection was not (HR 1.37, 95% CI, .86-2.18). This was unchanged after stratification on NIH trial participation, although mortality was higher in NIH-enrolling (HIV+: HR 1.65, 95% CI, .93-2.92; HIV+/HCV+: HR 3.15, 95% CI, 2.32-4.28) than in non-enrolling centers (HIV+: HR 1.03, 95% CI, .43-2.47, HIV+/HCV+: HR 2.55, 95% CI, 1.64-3.96). Although allograft loss was higher in HIV/HCV coinfected recipients transplanted at enrolling (HR 2.64, 9%% CI, 1.91-3.64) vs nonenrolling centers (HR 2.22, 95% CI, 1.41-3.49), there was no difference in HIV and HCV monoinfected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

HIV+ LT recipient outcomes were superior to HCV+ or HIV/HCV coinfected recipients. Despite a standardized approach and plausibly more experience with HIV patients, transplantation at NIH study center did not improve outcomes.