Search

Background: Daclatasvir and asunaprevir dual therapy is approved for the treatment of HCV genotype 1b infection in several countries. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of daclatasvir and asunaprevir dual therapy in Turkish patients. Material and Methods: Sixty-one patients with HCV genotype 1b were enrolled in the Turkish early access program. Most of the patients were in difficult-to-treat category. Patients were visited at each 4 week throughout the follow-up period. Laboratory findings and adverse events were recorded at each visit. Results: Fifty-seven of 61 enrolled patients completed 24 weeks of treatment. Two patients died as a result of underlying diseases at 12-14th weeks of treatment. Two patients stopped the treatment early as a consequence of virological breakthrough, and 2 patients had viral relapse at the post-treatment follow-up. Overall SVR12 rates were 90% (55/61) and 93.2% (55/59) according to intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analysis respectively. In ITT analysis, SVR12 was achieved by 93% (13/14) in relapsers, 80% (12/15) in interferon-ineligible patients and 91% (20/22) in previous nonresponder patients. SVR12 rates were 86.5% and 91.4% in patients with cirrhosis according to ITT and PP analysis respectively. SVR12 was 95.8% in non-cirrhosis group in both analysis. Patients with previous protease inhibitor experience had an SVR12 of 87.5%. Common adverse events developed in 28.8% of patients. There were no treatment related severe adverse event or grade-4 laboratory abnormality. Conclusions: Daclatasvir and asunaprevir dual therapy is found to be effective and safe in difficult-to-treat Turkish patients with HCV genotype 1b infection.

Background: Drug resistance development is an expected problem during treatment with protease inhibitors (PIs), this is largely due to the fact that Pls are low-genetic barrier drugs. Resistance-associated variants (RAVs) however may also occur naturally, and prior to treatment with Pls, the clinical impact of this basal resistance remains unknown. In Turkey, there is yet to be an investigation into the hepatitis C (HCV) drug associated resistance to oral antivirals. Materials and methods: 178 antiviral-naïve patients infected with HCV genotype 1 were selected from 27 clinical centers of various geographical regions in Turkey and included in the current study. The basal NS3 Pls resistance mutations of these patients were analyzed. Results: In 33 (18.5%) of the patients included in the study, at least one mutation pattern that can cause drug resistance was identified. The most frequently detected mutation pattern was T54S while R109K was the second most frequently detected. Following a more general examination of the patients studied, telaprevir (TVR) resistance in 27 patients (15.2%), boceprevir (BOC) resistance in 26 (14.6%) patients, simeprevir (SMV) resistance in 11 (6.2%) patients and faldaprevir resistance in 13 (7.3%) patients were detected. Our investigation also revealed that rebound developed in the presence of a Q80K mutation and amongst two V55A mutations following treatment with TVR, while no response to treatment was detected in a patient with a R55K mutation. Conclusion: We are of the opinion that drug resistance analyses can be beneficial and necessary in revealing which variants are responsible for pre-treatment natural resistance and which mutations are responsible for the viral breakthrough that may develop during the treatment.

Objectives: Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is now a more curable disease with new direct acting antivirals (DAA). Although high sustained virologic response rates, failures still occur in DAA regimens. Our objective in this study was to characterize the real-life presence of clinically relevant resistance – associated substitutions (RASs) in the HCV NS5A gene in CHC patients whose DAA regimen has failed. Methods: The study enrolled 53 CHC patients who experienced failure with DAA regimen as the prospective longitudinal cohort between 2017–2019. Genotypic resistance testing was performed via the viral population sequencing method and The Geno2pheno HCV tool was used for RAS analysis. Results: The most frequent failure category was relapse (88%) followed by non-responder (12%). For a total of 36% of patients, RASs was detected in NS5A, Y93H was the most detected RAS in GT1b infected patients (89%). Conclusions: This study establishes an HCV failure registry for Turkey in which samples were combined with clinical, virologic and molecular data of adult patients whose DAA therapy failed. RASs can occur in CHC patients with DAA treatment failures. Evaluation of RAS after DAA failure is very important before re-treatment is initiated to prevent virologic failure.