Sofosbuvir and simeprevir without ribavirin effectively treat hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection after liver transplantation in a two-center experience

Direct-acting antiviral agents for liver transplant recipients with recurrent genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Comprehensive evaluation of safety and efficacy of different combinations of direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs) in liver transplant recipients with genotype 1 (GT1) hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence remains limited. Therefore, we performed this systematic review and meta‐analysis in order to evaluate the clinical outcome of DAA treatment in liver transplant patients with HCV GT1 recurrence.

Methods

Studies were included if they contained information of 12 weeks sustained virologic response (SVR12) after DAA treatment completion as well as treatment related complications for liver transplant recipients with GT1 HCV recurrence.

Results

We identified 16 studies comprising 885 patients. The overall pooled estimate proportion of SVR12 was 93% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89, 0.96), with moderate heterogeneity observed (τ² = 0.01, P < 0.01, I²=75%). High tolerability was observed in liver transplant recipients reflected by serious adverse events (sAEs) with pooled estimate proportion of 4% (95% CI: 0.01, 0.07; τ² = 0.02, P < 0.01, I² = 81%). For subgroup analysis, a total of five different DAA regimens were applied for treating these patients. Sofosbuvir/Ledipasvir (SOF/LDV) led the highest pooled estimate SVR12 proportion, followed by Paritaprevir/Ritonavir/Ombitasivir/Dasabuvir (PrOD), Daclatasvir (DCV)/Simeprevir (SMV) ± Ribavirin (RBV), and SOF/SMV ± RBV, Asunaprevir (ASV)/DCV. There was a tendency for favoring a higher pooled SVR12 proportion in patients with METAVIR Stage F0‐F2 of 97% (95% CI: 0.93, 0.99) compared to 85% (95% CI: 0.79, 0.90) for stage F3‐F4 (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between LT recipients treated with or without RBV (P = 0.23).

Conclusions

Direct‐acting antiviral treatment is highly effective and well‐tolerated in liver transplant recipients with recurrent GT1 HCV infection.

Safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens after liver transplantation: longitudinal assessment of renal function in the prospective ANRS CO23 CUPILT study

BACKGROUND

In liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C virus recurrence, there is concern about renal safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens. Changes in serum creatinine or in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) under treatment are used to look for possible renal toxicity. However, serum creatinine and eGFR are highly variable.

AIM

To analyse renal function trajectory with numerous assays of serum creatinine over a long period of time.

METHODS

In a multicentre cohort of 139 patients, the eGFR was obtained from serum creatinine using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation. Slopes of eGFR were defined as a change in eGFR during a period divided by time. Pre-treatment, on-treatment and post-treatment periods were 9 months, 3-9 months and 4.5 months. Interactions between eGFR slopes and the pre-treatment eGFR, use of ribavirin or mycophenolate mofetil, and stage of fibrosis were addressed. On-treatment eGFR slopes were separated in tertiles. Pre- and post-treatment eGFR slopes were compared globally and according to tertiles.

RESULTS

The post-treatment eGFR slope was significantly better than pre-treatment eGFR slope (+0.18 (IQR -0.76 to +1.32) vs -0.11 (IQR -1.01 to +0.73) mL/min/1.73 m² /month, P = 0.03) independently of the pre-treatment eGFR (P = 0.99), ribavirin administration (P = 0.26), mycophenolate mofetil administration (P = 0.51) and stage of fibrosis (F3 and F4 vs lower stages, P = 0.18; F4 vs lower stages, P = 0.08; F4 Child-Pugh B and C vs lower stages, P = 0.38). Tertiles of on-treatment eGFR slopes were -1.71 (IQR -2.54 to -1.48), -0.78 (IQR -1.03 to -0.36) and +0.75 (IQR +0.28 to +1.47) mL/min/1.73 m² /month. Pre- and post-treatment eGFR slopes were not significantly different according to tertiles (respectively, P = 0.34, 0.08, 0.73).

CONCLUSION

The eGFR varies during treatment and gives a confusing picture of the renal safety of sofosbuvir-based regimens. In contrast, longitudinal assessment of the eGFR shows a rising trajectory over longer time, meaning that these therapies are safe for the kidneys in our cohort of liver transplant recipients.

Use of direct-acting antiviral agents in hepatitis C virus-infected liver transplant candidates

Since the advent of direct acting antiviral (DAA) agents, chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment has evolved at a rapid pace. In contrast to prior regimen involving ribavirin and pegylated interferon, these newer agents are highly effective, well-tolerated, have shorter course of therapy and safer essentially in all HCV patients including those with advanced liver disease and following liver transplantation. Clinicians caring for HCV-infected patients on the liver transplant (LT) waitlist are often faced with a dilemma whether to treat HCV infection before or after liver transplantation. Sustained virological response (SVR) rates following HCV treatment may improve hepatic function sufficiently enough to negate the need for LT in certain patients. On the other hand, the decrease in MELD without improvement in quality of life in certain patients may lead to delay or dropout from potentially curative LT surgery list. In this context, our review focuses on the approach to and optimal timing of DAA-based treatment of HCV infection in LT candidates in the peri-transplant period.

Timing of Hepatitis C Virus Treatment in Liver Transplant Candidates in the Era of Direct-acting Antiviral Agents

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT) in the United States. While most patients with chronic HCV infection remain asymptomatic, up to one-third develop progressive liver disease resulting in cirrhosis. LT is often the only curative treatment once significant hepatic decompensation develops. However, antiviral therapy for HCV infection has advanced markedly in the past 5 years with the discovery and approval of direct-acting antiviral agents. These new regimens are well tolerated, of short duration and highly effective, unlike the traditional treatment with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin. As achieving sustained virological response becomes increasingly attainable for a majority of HCV-infected patients, concerns have been raised regarding the optimal timing of treatment for HCV infection in the setting of end-stage liver disease and during the peri-transplant period. On one hand, HCV treatment may improve hepatic function and negate the need for LT in some, which is crucial given the scarcity of donor organs and mortality on the waiting list in certain regions. On the other hand, HCV treatment may result in lowering the priority for LT without improving quality of life, thereby delaying potentially curative LT surgery. This review evaluates the evidence supporting the use of direct-acting antiviral agents in the period before and following LT.

Real-world cure rates for hepatitis C virus treatments that include simeprevir and/or sofosbuvir are comparable to clinical trial results

AIM

To assess the real-world effectiveness and cost of simeprevir (SMV), and/or sofosbuvir (SOF)-based therapy for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

METHODS

The real-world performance of patients treated with SMV/SOF ± ribavirin (RBV), SOF/RBV, and SOF/RBV with pegylated-interferon (PEG) were analyzed in a consecutive series of 508 patients with chronic HCV infection treated at a single academic medical center. Patients with genotypes 1 through 4 were included. Rates of sustained virological response - the absence of a detectable serum HCV RNA 12 wk after the end of treatment [sustained virological response (SVR) 12] - were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. Costs were calculated from the payer's perspective using Medicare/Medicaid fees and Redbook Wholesale Acquisition Costs. Patient-related factors associated with SVR12 were identified using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

SVR12 rates were as follows: 86% (95%CI: 80%-91%) among 178 patients on SMV/SOF ± RBV; 62% (95%CI: 55%-68%) among 234 patients on SOF/RBV; and 78% (95%CI: 68%-86%) among 96 patients on SOF/PEG/RBV. Mean costs-per-SVR12 were $174442 (standard deviation: ± $18588) for SMV/SOF ± RBV; $223003 (± $77946) for SOF/RBV; and $126496 (± $31052) for SOF/PEG/RBV. Among patients on SMV/SOF ± RBV, SVR12 was less likely in patients previously treated with a protease inhibitor [odds ratio (OR): 0.20, 95%CI: 0.06-0.56]. Higher bilirubin (OR: 0.47, 95%CI: 0.30-0.69) reduced the likelihood of SVR12 among patients on SOF/RBV, while FIB-4 score ≥ 3.25 reduced the likelihood of SVR12 (OR: 0.18, 95%CI: 0.05-0.59) among those on SOF/PEG/RBV.

CONCLUSION

SVR12 rates for SMV and/or SOF-based regimens in a diverse real-world population are comparable to those in clinical trials. Treatment failure accounts for 27% of costs.

Treatment with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir without ribavirin for 12 weeks is highly effective for recurrent hepatitis C virus genotype 1b infection after living donor liver transplantation: a Japanese multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

The optimal therapy for recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after liver transplantation has not yet been established. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of interferon-free therapy with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir without ribavirin for 12 weeks in Japanese patients with HCV genotype 1b infection after living donor liver transplantation.

METHODS

A cohort study of living donor liver transplant recipients with recurrent HCV genotype 1b infection treated with sofosbuvir (400 mg/day) and ledipasvir (90 mg/day) was performed at six liver transplant centers in Japan.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were treated with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir. Thirty-eight patients (70%) were treatment experienced, including 17 patients who had undergone prior direct-acting-antiviral-based triple therapy. Ten patients had resistance-associated substitutions at L31 or Y93 in the NS5A region of the HCV genome. Fifty-three patients completed the 12-week treatment protocol; treatment was discontinued in one patient who developed pneumonia at 4 weeks and died thereafter. All 53 patients who completed the treatment regimen achieved a sustained virological response 12 weeks after completion of treatment. Treatment was well tolerated in most patients, but seven patients developed serious adverse events, including hemorrhagic duodenal ulcers (n = 3), infection (n = 2), pleural effusion (n = 1), and alveolar hemorrhage (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Sofosbuvir and ledipasvir treatment without ribavirin for 12 weeks was highly effective in achieving a sustained virological response in Japanese patients who developed recurrent HCV genotype 1b infection after living donor liver transplantation.

Effectiveness of Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir with/without Ribavarin in Liver Transplant Recipients with Hepatitis C

Background and Aims: Recurrent infection of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in liver transplant (LT) recipients is universal and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir with and without ribavirin in LT recipients with recurrent genotype 1 hepatitis C. Results: Eighty-five LT recipients were treated for recurrent HCV with ledipasvir/sofosbuvirwith and without ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) time from LT to treatment initiation was 68 (±71) months. The mean (± SD) age of the cohort was 63 (±8.6) years old. Most recipients were male (70%). Baseline alanine transaminase, total bilirubin, and HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) values (± SD) were 76.8 (±126) mg/dL, 0.8 (±1.3) U/L, and 8,010,421.9 (±12,420,985) IU/mL, respectively. Five of 43 recipients who were treated with ribavirin required drug cessation due to side effects, with 4 of those being anemia complications. No recipient discontinued the ledipasvir/sofosbuvir. Eighty-one percent of recipients had undetectable viral levels at 4 weeks after starting therapy, and all recipients had complete viral suppression at the end of therapy. The sustained viral response at 12 weeks after completion of therapy was 94%. Conclusion : Ledipasvir and sofosbuvir with and without ribavirin therapy is an effective and well-tolerated interferon-free treatment for recurrent HCV infection after LT. Anemia is not uncommon in LT recipients receiving ribavirin.

The New Era of Hepatitis C: Therapy in Liver Transplant Recipients

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading cause of end-stage liver disease in both Europe and the United States and is the most common reason for liver transplant. In the absence of antiviral therapy, recurrent infection is the norm with subsequent graft hepatitis and impaired survival. Whether it may be better to postpone therapy in patients in whom higher risk of failure and toxicity is coupled with lower chance of liver function improvement likely depends on several factors, including waiting time, center allocation policy, presence of hepatocellular carcinoma and local prevalence of anti-HCV-positive donors.

Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based interferon-free therapies for hepatitis C in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based interferon-free therapies in liver transplantation recipients with hepatitis C virus infection recurrence.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL on the Cochrane Library without time or language limitation. The search strategy used was "sofosbuvir AND transplantation." Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12) rate, incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) and/or adverse events, discontinuation rate with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (1730 patients) were included for our meta-analysis. The pooled SVR12 rate was 90.1% (95% CI 86.4-93.4%, I²  = 81.6%). SVR12 rate was higher in patients with mild fibrosis than in patients with advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis (RR = 1.072, 95% CI 1.031-1.115, I²  = 3.6%). For patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1, the pooled SVR12 rate was 91.9% (95% CI 89.2-94.2%, I²  = 53.3%). The pooled SAEs incidence was 8.3% (95% CI 5.6-11.5%, I²  = 78.4%). The pooled discontinuation rate because of adverse events or SAEs was 3.3% (95% CI 1.8-5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Sofosbuvir-based interferon-free therapy is an effective and well-tolerated treatment strategy for patients with hepatitis C virus infection recurrence after liver transplantation.