Ledipasvir + Sofosbuvir for Liver Transplant Recipients With Recurrent Hepatitis C: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in post-liver transplant patients with previous direct-acting antiviral failure: Six case reports

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy regimens are highly effective at eliminating hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection but rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) are lower in patients with decompensated cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. Since many of these patients will be referred for liver transplant, they will require retreatment after transplantation. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir (SOF/VEL/VOX) is recommended by guidelines as the preferred regimen to treat HCV in DAA-experienced patients following liver transplant however there is limited data.

CASE SUMMARY

We present the cases of six liver transplant recipients who had previous treatment failure with sofosbuvir-based DAA therapy prior to transplantation and who then received SOF/VEL/VOX after transplant.

CONCLUSION

This case series demonstrate the real-world efficacy and safety of SOF/VEL/VOX in the post liver transplant setting. Treatment was successful with all patients achieving SVR, it was well tolerated, and there were minimal drug-drug interactions with their immunosuppressants.

Highly effective treatment response and well tolerability by all oral direct acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C patients post organ transplantation

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressant-related acceleration of fibrosis has been documented in chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients who receive organ transplantation (Tx), and sustained virological response (SVR) rates for these patients by pegylated interferon (IFN)-based therapy are generally poor and associated with unfavorable safety profiles. In addition, IFN treatment varies by patient and poses a high risk of post-renal Tx graft rejection. This study was aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of all oral direct acting antivirals (DAAs) for CHC patients following organ Tx.

METHODS

A total of 32 organ Tx (liver: 17, kidney: 13, kidney then liver: 1, and heart: 1) patients with CHC on an oral DAA (paritaprevir/ritonavir, ombitasvir, and dasabuvir: 11, daclatasvir and asunaprevir: 4, sofosbuvir-based: 17) were enrolled in the study. DAAs regimen was based by genotype/subtype, patient characteristics, drug interaction profiles, and health insurance coverage.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 61.4 ± 9.5 years, 50.0% male, and 15.6% with cirrhosis. Fourteen (43.7%) patients experienced unsuccessful IFN treatment. Genotype distribution was as follows: 1a: 6, 1b: 17, 2: 7, 3: 1, and 6: 1. Mean time between Tx and DAAs therapy was 77.3 ± 11.0 months. Baseline HCV RNA before DAAs was 6.20 ± 0.19 log10 IU/mL. After DAAs, the distribution of week 2 HCV RNA was as follows: <15 IU/mL (53.1%), 15 to 50 IU/mL (15.6%), 50 to 100 IU/mL (6.3%), and >100 IU/mL (25.0%), respectively. The rates of undetectable HCV RNA (<15 IU/mL) at week 4 and end-of-treatment were 93.8% and 100%, respectively. Subjective adverse events during therapy were generally mild, with no treatment terminations. After posttreatment follow-up, all 32 patients (100%) achieved SVR12.

CONCLUSION

Highly responsive treatment and favorable tolerability were achieved by all oral DAAs in this difficult-to-treat patient population.

Consensus on management of hepatitis C virus infection in resource-limited Ukraine and Commonwealth of Independent States regions

Globally, 69.6 million individuals were infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in 2016. Of the six major HCV genotypes (GT), the most predominant one is GT1, worldwide. The prevalence of HCV in Central Asia, which includes most of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), has been estimated to be 5.8% of the total global burden. The predominant genotype in the CIS and Ukraine regions has been reported to be GT1, followed by GT3. Inadequate HCV epidemiological data, multiple socio-economic barriers, and the lack of region-specific guidelines have impeded the optimal management of HCV infection in this region. In this regard, a panel of regional experts in the field of hepatology convened to discuss and provide recommendations on the diagnosis, treatment, and pre-, on-, and posttreatment assessment of chronic HCV infection and to ensure the optimal use of cost-effective antiviral regimens in the region. A comprehensive evaluation of the literature along with expert recommendations for the management of GT1-GT6 HCV infection with the antiviral agents available in the region has been provided in this review. This consensus document will help guide clinical decision-making during the management of HCV infection, further optimizing treatment outcomes in these regions.

A systematic review with meta-analysis: Is ribavirin necessary in sofosbuvir-based direct-acting antiviral therapies for patients with HCV recurrence after liver transplantation?

OBJECTIVES

With the appearance of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), sofosbuvir (SOF)-based DAAs are recommended for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Whether ribavirin (RBV) is needed by patients after LT in combination with SOF-based DAAs remains to be determined. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the necessity of RBV with SOF-based DAAs for post-LT patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases were systematically searched for eligible studies from the databases' inceptions until November 2018. We accepted the studies that included HCV recurrence in post-LT patients who were treated with SOF-based DAAs ± RBV, and evaluated the rate of sustained virological response 12 weeks (SVR12) after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

Twelve studies, comprising a total of 1466 LT recipients, were included in this study. The pooled SVR12 of these patients was 91% (95% CI: 84% to 95%). There was no statistical difference of SVR12 in the patients treated with SOF-based DAAs + RBV versus -RBV group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.03; P = 0.35) by different therapy duration (P = 0.26), with different targets of DAAs (P = 0.13) and in different regions (P = 0.34) but a tendency for a higher incidence of anemia in the +RBV group than in the -RBV group (RR = 5.18; 95% CI: 3.41 to 7.86; p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of RBV may not contribute to a higher SVR rate and could increase the incidence of anemia, so RBV is not necessary in SOF-based DAAs for patients with HCV recurrence after LT.

Trends of characteristics and outcomes of donors and recipients of deceased donor liver transplantation in the United States: 1990 to 2013

AIM

To compare trends in donor/recipient characteristics and outcomes using four period cohorts of liver transplant recipients from 1990 to 2009.

METHODS

Seventy thousand three hundred and seventy-seven adult first-time recipients of whole-organ deceased-donor liver grafts from 1990 to 2009 were followed up until September 2013. Four periods based on transplantation dates were considered to account for developments in transplantation. Descriptive statistics were used to describe donor/recipient characteristics and transplant outcomes. Statistical comparisons between periods were performed using χ2/Fischer's exact test (categorical variables) and t-tests/Mann-Whitney U test (continuous variables). Univariate descriptive statistics/survival data were generated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox Proportional Hazards models were used for regression analyses of patient and graft survival.

RESULTS

Mean age (years), body mass index (kg/m2), and the proportion of males were, respectively, 39.1 (± 17.4), 25.9 (± 5.7) and 60.3 for donors, and 51.3 (± 10.5), 27.7 (± 5.6), and 64.4 for recipients. Donor and transplantation rates differed between racial/ethnic groups. Median (Q1-Q3) cold and warm ischemia, waitlist, and hospital stay times were 8 (6.0-10.0) h and 45 (35-59) min, 93 (21-278) d, and 12 (8-20) d. Total functional assistance was required by 8% of recipients at wait-listing and 13.4% at transplantation. Overall survival at 1, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years was 87.3%, 79.4%, 73.6%, 59.8%, 46.7%, and 35.9%, respectively. The 2005-2009 cohort had better patient and graft survival than the 1990-1994 cohort overall [HR 0.67 (0.62-0.72) and 0.66 (0.62-0.71)] and at five years [HR 0.73 (0.66-0.80) and 0.71 (0.65-0.77)].

CONCLUSION

Despite changes in donor quality, recipient characteristics, and declining functional status among transplant recipients, overall patient survival is superior and post-transplant outcomes continue to improve.

Effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir ± ribavirin treatment in liver and/or renal transplant patients with chronic hepatitis C: A single-center experience

Objective:

Successful treatment is possible with novel direct-acting oral antiviral agents in solid organ transplant patients with hepatitis C. In this study, the effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir ± ribavirin treatment in liver and/or renal transplant patients with chronic hepatitis C were evaluated.

Materials and methods:

A total of 23 liver and/or renal transplant patients who received sofosbuvir/ledipasvir ± ribavirin for chronic hepatitis C over 12 or 24 weeks were enrolled in the study. The treatment response, clinical and laboratory adverse effects, and effect on immunosuppressive drug levels were assessed.

Results:

A total of 12 patients had undergone renal transplantation and 11 had undergone liver transplantation. All of the renal transplant patients and 91% of liver transplant patients had genotype 1. In total, 10 renal transplant patients and 4 liver transplant patients had treatment experience. Two renal transplant patients and one liver transplant patient had compensated cirrhosis. Nine renal transplant patients were on tacrolimus, and two were on cyclosporine; all of the liver transplant patients were on tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive therapy. While hepatitis C RNA was negative in 75% of renal transplant patients and 91% of liver transplant patients at week 4, it was negative in all of the patients at the end of treatment and 12 weeks after treatment. Significantly reduced hemoglobin levels were observed in patients administered ribavirin during treatment (p = 0.01). There were no significant differences between the baseline and treatment period values of mean creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, bilirubin, and tacrolimus levels. There were no adverse effects leading to treatment discontinuation.

Conclusion:

Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir ± ribavirin is quite safe and effective in hepatitis C treatment after liver and/or renal transplantation.