Differences in clinical outcomes among hepatitis C genotype 1-infected patients treated with peginterferon alpha-2a or peginterferon alpha-2b plus ribavirin: a meta-analysis

IL28B SNP rs12979860 is the Critical Predictor for Sustained Viral Response in Chinese Children Aged 1 to 6 Years with Chronic Hepatitis C

Clinical data on children with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) remain extremely limited. This study investigated sustained virologic response (SVR) to alfa-interferon 2b plus RBV treatment in children aged 1-6 years with unsafe injection-acquired CHC. 154 children with CHC aged 1 to 6 years were enrolled, 101 of them were male (65.6%) and 53 were female (34.4%), and they were treated with alfa-interferon at a dose of 1-5 MIU/m2 3 times weekly plus oral RBV (15 mg/kg/day) for 48 weeks. 57(39.3 %) of them were genotype 1b, 73(50.3%) were genotypes 2a, 15(10.3%) were undecided type. SVR was achieved in 53 of 57(93.0%) patients with genotype 1b, in 72 (98.6%) of 73 with genotype 2a, 15(100.0%) of 15 with undecided type. There was no significant statistical difference in SVR between male and female (98.0% vs 94.3%, p=0.340), genotype 2a and those with genotype 1b(98.6% vs 93.0%, p=0.160), ALT>40U/L group and ALT≤40U/L group(96.7% vs 96.8%, p=1.000), AST>40U/L group and AST≤40U/L group(95.9% vs 98.2%, p=0.654) as well as lower baseline viral load group (<6×105 IU/ml) and higher baseline viral load group(≥6×105 IU/ml)(97.3% vs 95.3%, p=0.916). Leucopenia, neutropenia, hemoglobin concentration decrease, fever, platelet count decrease and rash were 8.4%, 69.5%, 24.0%, 50.6%, 1.9% and 4.5%, respectively. And only 12(7.8%) individuals developed thyroid autoantibodies. The SVR was higher in patients with IL-28B genotype C/C than C/T (99.0% vs 80%, p=0.002). Compared with HCV viral genotype, ALT level and baseline viral load, IL-28B rs12979860 is more suitable for predicting antiviral efficacy in children with CHC. It is inappropriate to take the increase of ALT level as an essential indicator for antiviral treatment in children aged 1-6 years.

A novel approach to identify candidate prognostic factors for hepatitis C treatment response integrating clinical and viral genetic data

The combined therapy of pegylated interferon (IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV) has been for a long time the standard treatment for patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). In the case of genotype 1, only 38%–48% of patients have a positive response to the combined treatment. In previous studies, viral genetic information has been occasionally included as a predictor. Here, we consider viral genetic variation in addition to 11 clinical and 19 viral populations and evolutionary parameters to identify candidate baseline prognostic factors that could be involved in the treatment outcome. We obtained potential prognostic models for HCV subtypes la and lb in combination as well as separately. We also found that viral genetic information is relevant for the combined treatment assessment of patients, as the potential prognostic model of joint subtypes includes 9 viral-related variables out of 11. Our proposed methodology fully characterizes viral genetic information and finds a combination of positions that modulate inter-patient variability.

Estimating the clinical and economic benefit associated with incremental improvements in sustained virologic response in chronic hepatitis C

Introduction

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the principle causes of chronic liver disease. Successful treatment significantly decreases the risk of hepatic morbidity and mortality. Current standard of care achieves sustained virologic response (SVR) rates of 40–80%; however, the HCV therapy landscape is rapidly evolving. The objective of this study was to quantify the clinical and economic benefit associated with increasing levels of SVR.

Methods

A published Markov model (MONARCH) that simulates the natural history of hepatitis C over a lifetime horizon was used. Discounted and non-discounted life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost of complication management were estimated for various plausible SVR rates. To demonstrate the robustness of projections obtained, the model was validated to ten UK-specific HCV studies.

Results

QALY estimates ranged from 18.0 years for those treated successfully in fibrosis stage F0 to 7.5 years (discounted) for patients in fibrosis stage F4 who remain untreated. Predicted QALY gains per 10% improvement in SVR ranged from 0.23 (F0) to 0.64 (F4) and 0.58 (F0) to 1.35 (F4) in 40 year old patients (discounted and non-discounted results respectively). In those aged 40, projected discounted HCV-related costs are minimised with successful treatment in F0/F1 (at approximately £300), increasing to £49,300 in F4 patients who remain untreated. Validation of the model to published UK cost-effectiveness studies produce R2 goodness of fit statistics of 0.988, 0.978 and of 0.973 for total costs, QALYs and incremental cost effectiveness ratios, respectively.

Conclusion

Projecting the long-term clinical and economic consequences associated with chronic hepatitis C is a necessary requirement for the evaluation of new treatments. The principle analysis demonstrates the significant impact on expected costs, LYs and QALYs associated with increasing SVR. A validation analysis demonstrated the robustness of the results reported.

Efficacy and safety of pegylated interferon plus ribavirin therapy for chronic hepatitis C genotype 6: a meta-analysis

Background

Hepatitis C genotype 6 (HCV-6) is prevalent in Southeast Asia. Data on the efficacy of direct-acting antiviral agents in chronic HCV-6 patients is limited and pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV) combination therapy remains standard therapy for those patients.

Aim

Meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of Peg-IFN plus RBV combination therapy for chronic HCV-6 patients.

Methods

Relevant studies were found by database search through Medline, Embase, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. All published clinical trials assessing the efficacy of Peg-IFN plus RBV combination therapy for chronic HCV-6 patients were included. Sustained virological response rate (SVR) was pooled. We performed additional meta-analyses to compare the SVR outcomes of 24 versus 48 weeks of treatment in four head-to-head trials. Another second meta-analysis was also conducted to compare the efficacy of combination Peg-IFN plus RBV therapy in HCV-6 versus HCV-1 patients.

Results

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled SVR of all single arms was 75% (95% CI: 0.68–0.81). The SVR of 24 weeks treatment was significantly lower than that at 48 weeks, with a risk difference of −14% (95% CI: −0.25 to −0.02, p = 0.02). However, when restricted to the patients with rapid virological response (RVR), there was no significant effect on SVR between these two treatment groups, with a risk difference of −1% (95% CI: −0.1 to 0.07, p = 0.67). The SVR in HCV-6 patients was significantly higher than that in HCV-1 patients, with a relative risk of 1.35 (95% CI: 1.16–1.57, p<0.001). Side effects were common, but rarely caused treatment discontinuation.

Conclusions

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that Peg-IFN plus RBV is effective and safe for HCV-6 patients. Shortening treatment seems to be feasible in HCV-6 patients with RVR when tolerance to treatment is poor. However, this decision should be made cautiously.

SVR12 is higher than SVR24 in treatment-naïve hepatitis C genotype 1 patients treated with peginterferon plus ribavirin

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of interventions for the hepatitis C virus have historically used sustained virological response (SVR) at 24 weeks after treatment (SVR24) as the key effect measure. However, recent RCTs investigating the efficacy of new direct acting agents (DAAs) have used SVR at 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12). While there is evidence to suggest SVR24 and SVR12 are similar in patients receiving new DAAs, this is unlikely to be true for patients receiving backbone peginterferon-ribavirin control treatment. Establishing the difference between SVR12 and SVR24 for patients receiving peginterferon-ribavirin treatment is therefore necessary to avoid biased interpretations of the benefits of newer DAAs.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE®, Embase™, and Cochrane CENTRAL for RCTs with a peginterferon-ribavirin arm that used SVR24 and/or SVR12. As no RCTs reported on both, we pooled SVR12 and SVR24 proportions using conventional meta-analysis. Proportions were pooled separately for peginterferon alpha-2a and alpha-2b. Further, a Bayesian meta-regression model was employed to estimate the difference between SVR12 and SVR24.

RESULTS

Thirty-five RCTs including a peginterferon arm were identified. Twenty-four trials included a peginterferon alpha-2a plus ribavirin arms, of which 20 reported SVR24 and five reported SVR12. Seventeen trials included a peginterferon alpha-2b plus ribavirin arm, of which 16 reported SVR24 and one reported SVR12. Using Bayesian meta-regression, the pooled SVR12 was 6% higher than SVR24 with peginterferon alpha-2a (53% versus 47%) and 5% higher with peginterferon alpha-2b (45% versus 40%) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were only marginally overlapping. The meta-regression also demonstrated a marginally significant relative risk of 1.13 (95% CrI 0.99-1.26) of SVR12 versus SVR24. The conventional pairwise meta-analyses were consistent with these findings.

CONCLUSION

Considering the relatively large difference observed between SVR12 and SVR24, it seems reasonable to insist that future clinical trials report both to allow for complete transparency and clarity in their interpretation.

Pegylated interferon-α2a and ribavirin versus pegylated interferon-α2b and ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C : a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Results of trials and meta-analyses comparing pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN)-α2a and PEG-IFN-α2b for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C are conflicting.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine which PEG-IFN (α2a or α2b), in association with ribavirin, is the most effective for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C by performing an updated meta-analysis.

METHOD

MEDLINE (1950-2012) and EMBASE (1974-2012) databases, as well as the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were searched. Reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned, and proceedings of major international conferences were manually searched for abstracts. Randomized clinical trials and non-randomized clinical studies comparing PEG-IFN-α2a with PEG-IFN-α2b in association with ribavirin in adult patients with chronic hepatitis C were included. Studies including HIV-positive patients or liver transplant recipients were excluded. The data extraction from each study was conducted independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. The trial quality of randomized clinical trials was assessed by taking into account generation of allocation sequence, allocation concealment, efficacy of randomization, investigator blindness, description of withdrawals and dropouts and adherence to the intention-to-treat principle. Two meta-analyses were performed, the first including randomized clinical trials only, and the second including both randomized and non-randomized clinical studies. The primary outcome measure was frequency of sustained virological response (SVR). Heterogeneity and publication bias were systematically taken into account.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 26 studies, 11 randomized and 15 non-randomized, with a total of 18,260 patients: 8,125 treated with PEG-IFN-α2a and 10,135 treated with PEG-IFN-α2b. In the meta-analysis that included randomized trials only, the SVR was significantly higher for patients treated with PEG-IFN-α2a than for those treated with PEG-IFN-α2b for genotypes 1 and 4 [odds ratio (OR) 1.45; 95 % CI 1.09-2.06; p = 0.013] and for all genotypes (OR 1.34; 95 % CI 1.05-1.72; p = 0.02). In the meta-analysis including both randomized and non-randomized studies, the SVR was significantly higher for PEG-IFN-α2a than for PEG-IFN-α2b for all genotypes (OR 1.24; 95 % CI 1.10-1.40; p < 0.001) and for genotypes 1 and 4 (OR 1.25; 95 % CI 1.14-1.36; p < 0.001); for genotypes 2 and 3, the SVR was greater for treatment with PEG-IFN-α2a than with PEG-IFN-α2b, with the difference tending towards significance (OR 1.15; 95 % CI 0.98-1.35; p = 0.08). A certain degree of heterogeneity was present amongst the various studies included in this meta-analysis. Publication bias was detected (particularly for analyses including only randomized controlled trials) and taken into account using appropriate statistical methods.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that PEG-IFN-α2a and ribavirin is associated with a higher SVR than PEG-IFN-α2b and ribavirin in patients mono-infected with hepatitis C, particularly for genotypes 1 and 4.

Interpreting discordant indirect and multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses: an evaluation of direct acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C infection

Indirect treatment comparison (ITC) and multiple treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analyses are increasingly being used to estimate the comparative effectiveness of interventions when head-to-head data do not exist. ITC meta-analyses can be conducted using simple methodology to compare two interventions. MTC meta-analyses can be conducted using more complex methodology, often employing Bayesian approaches, to compare multiple interventions. As the number of ITC and MTC meta-analyses increase, it is common to find multiple analyses evaluating the same interventions in similar therapeutic areas. Depending on the choice of the methodological approach, the conclusions about relative treatment efficacy may differ. Such situations create uncertainty for decision makers. An illustration of this is provided by four ITC and MTC meta-analyses assessing the efficacy of boceprevir and telaprevir for chronic hepatitis C virus infection. This paper examines why these evaluations provide discordant results by examining specific methodological issues that can strengthen or weaken inferences.

Direct-acting antiviral therapies for hepatitis C genotype 1 infection: a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

New direct-acting antiviral agents for hepatitis C genotype 1 infection, boceprevir and telaprevir, offer enhanced sustained virologic response (SVR) among both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients.

AIM

To determine the relative efficacy of the new direct-acting antiviral agents by applying a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis.

DESIGN

We included published Phase II and III randomized controlled trials evaluating head-to-head comparisons between boceprevir, telaprevir, peg-interferon alpha-2a with ribavirin and peg-interferon alpha-2b with ribavirin in hepatitis C genotype 1 patients. We applied Bayesian multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included data from four boceprevir, three telaprevir and six peg-interferon alpha-2a plus ribavirin vs. peg-interferon alpha-2b plus ribavirin randomized controlled trials. Both boceprevir and telaprevir offer statistically superior outcomes for SVR, relapse and discontinuation due to adverse events than either peg-interferons among both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients. Among treatment-naïve patients, clinical outcomes were similar for boceprevir and telaprevir, for SVR [odds ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% credible interval (95% CrI) 0.41-1.91] and for relapse (OR 1.09, 95% CrI 0.19-4.84). Similarly, among treatment-experienced patients, clinical outcomes were similar for boceprevir and telaprevir and for SVR (OR 1.45, 95% CrI 0.70-3.08) and for relapse (OR 0.35, 95% CrI 0.13-1.02). For treatment-naïve patients receiving standard-duration therapy, telaprevir yielded lower rates of anemia and neutropenia, but higher rates of rash and pruritus. For treatment-experience patients, all adverse event rates were higher with telaprevir.

DISCUSSION

Boceprevir and telaprevir exhibit similar effects among hepatitis C genotype 1 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients.

Budget impact analysis of boceprevir and telaprevir for the treatment of hepatitis C genotype 1 infection

BACKGROUND

Boceprevir and telaprevir have recently showed dramatically better treatment outcomes than conventional PEGylated interferon plus ribavirin for the treatment of hepatitis C virus genotype 1, but the average cost per patient is unknown.

METHODS

In the UK context, we performed a budget impact analysis to estimate the average per patient cost of adding boceprevir or telaprevir to PEGylated interferon plus ribavirin therapy. We considered both standard-duration therapy and response-guided therapy regimens of boceprevir and telaprevir for treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients. Our model utilized monthly discontinuation rates. We built a Bayesian Markov model to account for uncertainty associated with the clinical input and cost data.

RESULTS

The total average cost of response-guided therapy with boceprevir is £22,850 and £25,060 for treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients, respectively. By comparison, the total average cost of response-guided therapy with telaprevir was £29,930 and £31,880 for treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients, respectively, whereas the total average cost of standard-duration boceprevir is £34,680 and £34,350 and for telaprevir was £32,530 and £31,680 for treatment-naïve and treatment experienced patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that response-guided therapy with boceprevir is notably less costly than response-guided therapy with telaprevir. Our results also suggest that the standard treatment duration of boceprevir is slightly more costly than the standard treatment duration of telaprevir.