Search

Background and Aims: Patients with overt or occult hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection receiving immunosuppressive treatments have a wide risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr). We performed meta-analysis with decision curve analyses (DCA) to estimate the risk of HBVr in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients naïve to nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) receiving immunosuppressive treatments., Approach and Results: Studies were identified through literature search until October 2022. Pooled estimates were obtained using random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed according to underlying disease and immunosuppressive treatments. DCA was used to identify the threshold probability associated with the net benefit of antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients. We selected 68 studies (40 retrospective and 28 prospective), including 8034 patients with HBsAg negative anti-HBc positive. HBVr was 4% (95% CI 3%-6%) in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients, with a significantly high heterogeneity (I 2 69%; p < .01). The number-needed-to-treat (NNT) by DCA ranged from 8 to 24 for chemotherapy plus rituximab, from 12 to 24 for targeted therapies in cancer patients and from 13 to 39 for immune-mediated diseases. Net benefit was small for monoclonal antibodies., Conclusions: Our DCA in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients provided evidence that NA prophylaxis is strongly recommended in patients treated with chemotherapy combined with rituximab and could be appropriate in patients with cancer treated with targeted therapies and in patients with immune-mediated diseases. Finally, in patients with cancer treated with monoclonal antibodies or with chemotherapy without rituximab, the net benefit is even lower., (© 2024 The Author(s). Liver International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Following the advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection can be cured in almost all infected patients. This has led to a number of clinical questions regarding the optimal management of the millions of patients cured of HCV. This position statement provides specific guidance on the appropriate follow-up after a sustained virological response in patients without advanced fibrosis, those with compensated advanced chronic liver disease, and those with decompensated cirrhosis. Guidance on hepatocellular carcinoma risk assessment and the management of extrahepatic manifestations of HCV is also provided. Finally, guidance is provided on the monitoring and treatment of reinfection in at-risk patients. The recommendations are based on the best available evidence and are intended to help healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients after treatment for HCV., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The benefit of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against HCV following successful treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This meta-analysis of individual patient data assessed HCC recurrence risk following DAA administration., Design: We pooled the data of 977 consecutive patients from 21 studies of HCV-related cirrhosis and HCC, who achieved complete radiological response after surgical/locoregional treatments and received DAAs (DAA group). Recurrence or death risk was expressed as HCC recurrence or death per 100 person-years (100PY). Propensity score-matched patients from the ITA.LI.CA. cohort (n=328) served as DAA-unexposed controls (no-DAA group). Risk factors for HCC recurrence were identified using random-effects Poisson., Results: Recurrence rate and death risk per 100PY in DAA-treated patients were 20 (95% CI 13.9 to 29.8, I 2 =74.6%) and 5.7 (2.5 to 15.3, I 2 =54.3), respectively. Predictive factors for recurrence were alpha-fetoprotein logarithm (relative risk (RR)=1.11, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.19; p=0.01, per 1 log of ng/mL), HCC recurrence history pre-DAA initiation (RR=1.11, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.16; p<0.001), performance status (2 vs 0, RR=4.35, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.11; 2 vs 1, RR=3.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 11.11; p=0.01) and tumour burden pre-HCC treatment (multifocal vs solitary nodule, RR=1.75, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.43; p<0.001). No significant difference was observed in RR between the DAA-exposed and DAA-unexposed groups in propensity score-matched patients (RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.1; p=0.1)., Conclusion: Effects of DAA exposure on HCC recurrence risk remain inconclusive. Active clinical and radiological follow-up of patients with HCC after HCV eradication with DAA is justified., Competing Interests: Competing interests: VS: travel funding from Bayer. FT: DSMB fees from Basilea Pharmaceutica International and ROVI; educational fees from Janssen and Ferrer. PN: consults for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Gilead, Ipsen, Roche. He received grants from AbbVie and BMS. ZM: speaker fees and consultancy for Gilead and AbbVie. RT: personal fees from Merk Sharp & Dorme, Giliad Sciences and AbbVie GK. TM: personal fees from Merk Sharp & Dorme, Giliad Sciences and AbbVie GK. XF: consultancy fees for AbbVie and Gilead Sciences. HT: speaker fees from AbbVie, Gildead, MSD and Bayer. SB: consultancy fees and educational grants from: Gilead Sciences, MSD, Intercept. ED: advisory board from AbbVie; speaking and teaching from Gilead, MSD, AbbVie. M-LY: research grant from Abbott, BMS, Gilead and Merck; consultant of AbbVie, Abbott, BMS, Gilead, Merck and Roche; speaker of AbbVie, Abbott, BMS, Gilead and Merck. YA: donation-funded department funded by Toray Industries Inc., Gilead Sciences, AbbVie GK and Fuji Rebio Inc. AS: has received research funding from AbbVie and Gilead. He has served as a consultant for Wako Diagnostics, Glycotest, Exact Sciences, Roche, GRAIL, Genentech, Bayer, Eisai, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, BMS and TARGET Pharmasolutions. MK: lecture fees from Abott and AstraZeneca. J-FD: advisory committees: AbbVie, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Falk, Genfit, Genkyotex, Gilead Sciences, HepaRegenix, Intercept, Lilly, Merck, Novartis. Speaking and teaching: Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Intercept, Genfit, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, Roche. NM: research founding, lecture fees, advisory committees and travel grants from MSD. Lecture fees, advisory committees and travel grants from AbbVie and Gilead. SP: consulting and lecturing fees from Janssen, Gilead, MSD, AbbVie, Biotest, Shinogui, Viiv and grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Roche and MSD, without relation to this manuscript. JC: grants and research support from Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, MSD, Shionogi and Intercept Pharmaceuticals (all outside the submitted work). Is a speaker for Gilead Sciences and AbbVie. JLC: reports grant support and/or consultancy and lecture fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen and MSD. RV: research grant from AbbVie. GS: consultancy fees and lecture fees from Gilead and AbbVie. FPR: lecture fees AbbVie, Gilead, MSD, Biotest; travel funds AbbVie, Biotest, Kedrion; research funds AbbVie, Gilead, MSD. RB: research grants from MSD, AbbVie and Gilead. JR: educational grants from Amgen, Grüenenthal Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim España, Janssen-Cilag, Ferrer International, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Roche Farma. FT: consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eisai and Sirtex. Lecture fees from AlfaSigma and Bayer. Research grants from Bayer. CC: consultancy fees from Bayer, EISAI, MSD, Gilead, ABV. JB: consultancy fees from Arqule, Bayer, Novartis, BMS, BTG-Biocompatibles, Eisai, Kowa, Terumo, Gilead, Bio-Alliance/Onxeo, Roche, AbbVie, Merck, Sirtex, Ipsen, Astra-Medimmune, Incyte, Quirem, Adaptimmune, Lilly, Basilea, Nerviano. Research grants from Bayer and BTG. Educational grants from Bayer and BTG. Lecture fees from Bayer, BTG-Biocompatibles, Eisai, Terumo, Sirtex, Ipsen. GC: consultancy fees from Bayer, Ipsen. MR: consultancy fees from Bayer, BMS, Roche, Ipsen, AstraZeneca and Lilly. Lecture fees from Bayer, BMS, Gilead, Lilly and Roche. Research grants from Bayer and Ipsen., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The potential impact of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC)-B/C stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is understudied. Patients with HCC have been systematically excluded from randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of DAAs. Thus, the benefits of DAAs in patients with HCC are less well defined. The presence of active HCC before the initiation of DAA treatment is reported to be a predictor of DAA failure, and studies in patients without HCC have demonstrated that improvements in cirrhosis complications were lower or absent after DAA failure. Even if viral eradication is achieved using DAAs, reversal of liver function impairment may take longer than the development of end-stage cancer status. Additionally, the impact of DAAs on HCC recurrence is still a controversial topic. Thus, the decision of whether to use DAAs should be made on a patient-by-patient basis, and each patient should be informed of all the potential risks and benefits associated with their usage. This document summarises the current data on the usage of DAAs in BCLC-B/C patients, discusses the concept of "the point of no return" in the setting of DAAs, and proposes tools for deciding the best option for each patient profile. If liver function improvement overlaps with symptomatic HCC progression, the benefits of DAAs could be minimised, worsened, or fully counterbalanced. If the BCLC stage is defined using only liver dysfunction, the decision to prioritise DAA treatment should be based on the option (or lack thereof) of liver transplantation and/or the HCC stage. We propose applying a shared decision-making approach, informing each patient of all the potential risks and benefits of the proposed medical intervention., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Giuseppe Cabibbo: Consultancy fees from Bayer, Ipsen. María Reig: Consultancy fees from Bayer, BMS, Roche, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, and Lilly; lecture fees from Bayer, BMS, Gilead, Lilly, and Roche; and research grants from Bayer and Ipsen. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (Copyright © 2021 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: The effectiveness of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV), following successful treatment of early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), has been studied extensively. However, the benefit in terms of overall survival (OS) remains to be conclusively demonstrated. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of DAAs on OS, HCC recurrence, and hepatic decompensation., Methods: We prospectively enrolled 163 consecutive patients with HCV-related cirrhosis and a first diagnosis of early Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0/A HCC, who had achieved a complete radiologic response after curative resection or ablation and were subsequently treated with DAAs. DAA-untreated patients from the ITA.LI.CA. cohort (n = 328) served as controls. After propensity score matching, outcomes of 102 DAA-treated (DAA group) and 102 DAA-untreated patients (No DAA group) were compared., Results: In the DAA group, 7/102 patients (6.9%) died, HCC recurred in 28/102 patients (27.5%) and hepatic decompensation occurred in 6/102 patients (5.9%), after a mean follow-up of 21.4 months. OS was significantly higher in the DAA group compared to the No DAA group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39; 95% CI0.17-0.91; p = 0.03). HCC recurrence was not significantly different between the DAA and No DAA groups (HR0.70; 95% CI0.44-1.13; p = 0.15). A significant reduction in the rate of hepatic decompensation was observed in the DAA group compared with the No DAA group (HR0.32; 95% CI0.13-0.84; p = 0.02). In the DAA group, sustained virologic response was a significant predictor of OS (HR 0.02; 95% CI 0.00-0.19; p <0.001), HCC recurrence (HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.11-0.57; p <0.001) and hepatic decompensation (HR 0.12; 95% CI 0.02-0.38; p = 0.02)., Conclusions: In patients with HCV-related cirrhosis who had been successfully treated for early HCC, DAAs significantly improved OS compared with No DAA treatment., Lay Summary: We aimed to determine whether direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) significantly improve overall survival in patients with hepatitis C virus-related compensated cirrhosis and a first diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) which has been successfully treated with curative resection or ablation. Using propensity-score matched patients, we found that DAAs improved overall survival and reduced the risk of hepatic decompensation. However, the risk of HCC recurrence was not significantly reduced., (Copyright © 2019 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Concerns were raised about a high occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after successful treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) by direct-acting antivirals (DAAs)., Areas Covered: The authors summarize the clinical studies reporting the occurrence rate and risk factors of HCC after DAAs in CHC., Expert Opinion: The recent introduction of all-oral DAAs has substantially changed the scenario of CHC, achieving a sustained virological response (SVR) in >90% of cases. Earlier concerns raised about an increasing incidence of HCC post-DAAs were flawed by large heterogeneity of patients, the limited number of well-designed prospective studies (only nine, up to date) and the inclusion of a large number of patients with advanced liver disease, previously excluded from interferon-based studies. Current data on DAAs have shown a lower risk of HCC development; however, they were unable to identify patients at greater risk for HCC occurrence after SVR. Surveillance strategy, likely lifelong, is mandatory in these patients according to general expert opinion.

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) revolutionised the treatment of chronic HCV-related disease achieving high rates of sustained virological response (SVR), also in more advanced patients, with a good safety profile and a proven positive effect on the reduction of risk of HCC occurrence. Nevertheless, patients with an history of successfully treated early HCC were initially excluded from pivotal trials. Although some initial retrospective studies, affected by several methodological issues, raised concerns regarding a possible harmful effect on the risk of HCC recurrence after antiviral therapy, more recent prospective studies and meta-analyses provided evidence that risk of HCC recurrence after DAA therapy is similar, or even lower, than that observed in patients treated with interferon or in DAA-untreated controls. In the future, a meta-analyses of individual patient data would be necessary to definitively close this clinical debate, as well as prospective studies assessing ‘true endpoints’, such as overall survival.

Direct acting antivirals stabilize or improve liver function in the majority of patients with hepatitis C virus cirrhosis. Hepatic decompensation is the main driver of death of patients with early, successfully treated hepatocellular carcinoma superimposed to cirrhosis. Treatment with direct acting antivirals could improve the prognosis of these subjects, independently from the subsequent course of hepatocellular carcinoma, if the efficacy in obtaining viral clearance is as high as in patients without a history of hepatocellular carcinoma, and if the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence is unaffected. When dealing with hepatocellular carcinoma patients, direct acting antivirals can be indicated in two different settings: (a) subjects in which hepatocellular carcinoma has been already successfully treated ("cured" hepatocellular carcinoma), or (b) subjects whose hepatocellular carcinoma is still untreated or untreatable ("active" hepatocellular carcinoma). Although there are abundant data on "cured" hepatocellular carcinoma, evidence supporting treatment decisions in patients with "active" hepatocellular carcinoma is at best scarce and controversial, since these patients as well as patients with hepatocellular carcinoma listed for liver transplantation are usually excluded from treatment., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background & Aims: Studies have produced conflicting results of the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with hepatitis C virus-associated cirrhosis treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). Data from clinics are needed to accurately assess the occurrence rate of HCC in patients with cirrhosis in the real world., Methods: We collected data from a large prospective study of 2,249 consecutive patients (mean age = 65.4 years, 56.9% male) with hepatitis C virus-associated cirrhosis (90.5% with Child-Pugh class A and 9.5% with Child-Pugh class B) treated with DAAs from March 2015 through July 2016 at 22 academic and community liver centers in Sicily, Italy. HCC occurrence was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox regression analysis was used to identify variables associated with HCC development., Results: A sustained virologic response (SVR) was achieved by 2,140 patients (total = 95.2%; 95.9% with Child Pugh class A and 88.3% with Child Pugh class B; P < .001). Seventy-eight patients (3.5%) developed HCC during a mean follow-up of 14 months (range = 6-24 months). At 1 year after exposure to DAAs, HCC developed in 2.1% of patients with Child-Pugh class A with an SVR and 6.6% of patients with no SVR and in 7.8% of patients with Child-Pugh class B with an SVR and 12.4% of patients with no SVR (P < .001 by log-rank test). Albumin level below 3.5 g/dL (hazard ratio = 1.77, 95% confidence interval = 1.12-2.82, P = .015), platelet count below 120 × 10 9 /L (hazard ratio = 3.89, 95% confidence interval = 2.11-7.15, P < .001), and absence of an SVR (hazard ratio = 3.40, 95% confidence interval = 1.89-6.12, P < .001) were independently associated increased risk for HCC. The mean interval from exposure to DAAs to an HCC diagnosis was 9.8 months (range = 2-22 months) and did not differ significantly between patients with (n = 64, 9.2 months) and without (n = 14, 12.0 months) an SVR (P = .11). A larger proportion of patients with an SVR had a single HCC lesion (78% vs 50% without an SVR; P = .009) or an HCC lesion smaller than 3 cm (58% vs 28% without an SVR; P = .07)., Conclusions: In an analysis of data from a large prospective study of patients with hepatitis C virus-associated compensated or decompensated cirrhosis, we found that the SVR to DAA treatment decreased the incidence of HCC over a mean follow-up of 14 months., (Copyright © 2018 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data on HCV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) early recurrence in patients whose HCC was previously cured, and subsequently treated by direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), are equivocal., Aim: To assess the risk of HCC early recurrence after DAAs exposure in a large prospective cohort of HCV-cirrhotic patients with previous successfully treated HCC, also looking for risk factors for cancer early recurrence., Methods: We enrolled 143 consecutive patients with complete response after curative treatment of HCC, subsequently treated with DAAs and monitored by the web-based RESIST-HCV database. Clinical, biological, and virological data were collected. The primary endpoint was the probability of HCC early recurrence from DAA starting by Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Eighty-six per cent of patients were in Child-Pugh class A and 76% of patients were BCLC A. Almost all patients (96%) achieved sustained virological response. Twenty-four HCC recurrences were observed, with nodular or infiltrative pattern in 83% and 17% of patients, respectively. The 6-, 12- and 18-month HCC recurrence rates were 12%, 26.6% and 29.1%, respectively. Main tumour size and history of prior HCC recurrence were independent risk factors for HCC recurrence by Cox multivariate model., Conclusions: Probability of HCC early recurrence in patients who had HCC previously cured remains high, despite HCV eradication by DAAs. Risk was comparable but not higher to that reported in literature in DAA-untreated patients. Previous HCC recurrence and tumour size can be used to stratify the risk of HCC early recurrence. Further studies are needed to assess impact of DAAs on late recurrence and mortality., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Few studies examined the outcome of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis who developed hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The relative weight as determinant of death for cancer vs end-stage liver disease (ESLD) and the benefit of HCV eradication remain undefined. This multicentre, retrospective analysis evaluates overall survival (OS), rate of decompensation and tumour recurrence in compensated HCC patients treated with interferon (IFN) according to HCV status since HCC diagnosis., Methods: Two groups of patients with HCV-related cirrhosis and HCC were followed since HCC diagnosis: (i) compensated cirrhotics with prior sustained virological response (SVR) on IFN-based regimens (N=19); (ii) compensated cirrhotics without SVR (viraemic) (N=156)., Results: Over a median follow-up of 3.0 years since the onset of HCC, OS was longer for HCC patients with SVR than for viraemic patients (log-rank P=.004). The 5-year OS rate was 65.9% in patients with SVR vs 31.9% in viraemic patients. Similar trends were reported for hepatic decompensation (log-rank P=.01) and tumour recurrence (log-rank P=.01). These findings were confirmed at multivariable and propensity score analysis. At propensity analysis, 0/19 compensated patients with SVR died for ESLD vs 7/19 (37%) viraemic patients (P=.004). HCC mortality was similar in the two groups., Conclusions: Hepatocellular carcinoma patients with prior SVR and compensated cirrhosis at the time of tumour diagnosis have prolonged OS than viraemic patients. Given the lack of cirrhosis progression, no SVR patient ultimately died for ESLD while this condition appears the main cause of death among viraemic patients., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The European Association for the Study of the Liver Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) international meeting held in Geneva in February 2017 focused on the state of the art of HCC management, from diagnosis to treatment and the potential development of clinical research in this field. This report reviews some of the most interesting topics discussed at the meeting such as the role of hepatitis C viral infection treatment with direct-acting antivirals in enhancing HCC risk, current prognostic systems, early diagnosis techniques, curative therapies for early HCC and the systemic treatments for advanced disease with a look into future perspectives.

Background & Aims: Clearance of hepatitis C virus (HCV) via antiviral treatment changes the course of liver disease. We evaluated the benefit of sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients with HCV and cirrhosis without (stage 1) and with (stage 2) esophageal varices (EV)., Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of 444 patients with HCV and compensated cirrhosis (218 with stage 1 and 226 with stage 2 disease) treated with peg-interferon and ribavirin from June 2001 through December 2009 at the University of Palermo, Italy and followed for a median of 7.6 years (range, 1-12.6 years). We used Cox regression analysis to identify variables associated with appearance or progression of EVs, development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver decompensation, and overall survival., Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis, 67 patients with stage 1 disease (30.7%) and 41 patients with stage 2 disease (18.1%) achieved an SVR (P = .003). Patients with stage 1 disease and an SVR were less likely to develop EVs than stage 1 patients without an SVR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.48; P < .001). However, SVR did not affect whether patients with stage 2 disease developed further EVs (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.33-1.03; P = .07, by log-rank test). An SVR was associated with lower risk for HCC (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.55; P < .001). Patients with stage 2 disease, regardless of SVR, were at greater risk than patients with stage 1 disease for liver decompensation (HR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.73-4.59; P < .001) or death (HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.12-2.80; P = .015). A lower proportion of patients with stage 1 disease and an SVR died from HCC (2.9%), compared with those without an SVR (11.9%) (P = .03) or developed liver decompensation (none vs 7.1% without an SVR; P = .009). A lower proportion of patients with stage 2 disease and an SVR died from causes secondary to HCC (2.0%) compared with those without an SVR (18.4%) (P = .003). Death from causes secondary to liver decompensation did not differ significantly between patients with stage 2 disease with or without an SVR (12.1% vs 25.4%; P = .15)., Conclusions: In a prospective study of 444 patients with HCV and compensated cirrhosis, HCV eradication reduced risk for liver decompensation, HCC, and death, regardless of whether the patients had EVs., (Copyright © 2016 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of boceprevir-based triple therapy compared to peginterferon alpha and ribavirin dual therapy in untreated patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C; patients were discriminated according to the combination of baseline plus on-treatment predictors of boceprevir-based triple therapy., Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis performed according to data from the available published literature. The target population was composed of untreated Caucasian patients, aged 50 years, with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C, and these were evaluated over a lifetime horizon by Markov model. The study was carried out from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Outcomes included discounted costs (in euro, at 2013 value), life-years gained, quality-adjusted life year, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The robustness of the results was evaluated by multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Results: According to the baseline predictors of sustained virological response (genotype 1b, low viral load, fibrosis F0-F3, and body mass index) and the 1Log drop of HCV-RNA after the dual therapy lead-in period, boceprevir was cost-effective in different patient profiles., Conclusions: In untreated genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C patients, the cost-effectiveness of boceprevir-based triple therapy widely ranges according to different profiles of sustained virological response predictors, allowing optimization and personalization of triple therapy., (Copyright © 2014 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir (SOF)-based triple therapy (TT) compared with boceprevir (BOC)- and telaprevir (TVR)-based TT in untreated genotype 1 (G1) chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients discriminated according to IL28B genotype, severity of liver fibrosis, and G1 subtype. The available published literature provided the data source. The target population was made up of untreated Caucasian patients, aged 50 years, with G1CHC and these were evaluated over a lifetime horizon by Markov model. The study was carried out from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Outcomes included discounted costs (in euros at 2013 value), life-years gained (LYG), quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Cost of SOF was assumed to be € 3,500 per week, i.e., the price generating a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 25,000 per LYG compared with TVR in the entire population of untreated G1 patients. The robustness of the results was evaluated by one-way deterministic and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses. SOF was cost-effective compared with BOC in all strategies with the exception of cirrhosis and IL28B CC patients. In comparison with TVR-based strategies, SOF was cost-effective in IL28B CT/TT (ICER per LYG € 22,229) and G1a (€ 19,359) patients, not cost-effective in IL28B CC (€45,330), fibrosis F0-F3 (€ 26,444), and in cirrhosis (€ 34,906) patients, and dominated in G1b patients. The models were sensitive to SOF prices and to likelihood of sustained virological response., Conclusion: In untreated G1 CHC patients, SOF-based TT may be a cost-effective alternative to first-generation protease inhibitors depending on pricing. The cost-effectiveness of SOF improved in IL28B CT/TT and G1a patients. SOF was dominated by TVR in G1b patients even if, in clinical practice, this issue could be counterbalanced by the good tolerability profile of SOF and by the shorter treatment duration., (© 2014 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background & Aims: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that triple therapy (TT) with peginterferon alfa, ribavirin, and boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) is more effective than peginterferon-ribavirin dual therapy (DT) in the treatment of genotype 1 (G1) chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients with previous relapse (RR), partial response (PAR), and null-response (NR). We assess the cost-effectiveness of TT compared to no therapy in the treatment of patients previously treated with G1 CHC., Methods: The available published literature provided the data source. The target population was made up of previously treated Caucasian patients with G1 CHC and these were evaluated over a lifetime horizon by Markov model. The study was carried out from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Outcomes included discounted costs (in euro at 2012 value), life years gained (LYG), quality adjusted life year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).The robustness of the results was evaluated by one-way deterministic and multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Results: In RR patients, ICER per LYG compared to no therapy was €9555 for BOC-LEAD-IN-RR and €7910 for TVR-LEAD-IN-RR, being BOC dominated by TVR. In PAR patients, ICER for LYG was €11,947 for BOC-LEAD-IN-PAR and €14,931 for TVR-PAR, being TVR cost-effective compared to BOC (ICER for QALY €22,258). In NR patients, ICER for LYG was €26,499 for TVR-LEAD-IN-NR. The models were sensitive to likelihood of sustained virological response and to BOC/TVR prices., Conclusions: 1st generation HCV PI is highly cost-effective compared to no therapy in RR and PAR G1 CHC patients. TVR dominated BOC in RR, and was cost-effective compared to BOC in PAR patients. In NR patients an assessment of the response after a lead-in period should be performed to improve safety and cost-effectiveness., (Copyright © 2013 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background/aims: Efficacy of retreatment with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) plus ribavirin of non-responders to standard or pegylated IFN plus ribavirin has been assessed in various studies, but sustained virologic response (SVR) rates are variable and factors influencing efficacy and tolerability still remain incompletely defined. We aimed to focus on SVR rates and to identify factors influencing them in this meta-analysis., Methods: MEDLINE as well as a manual search were used. Studies were included if they were controlled or uncontrolled trials, if they had been published as full-length papers and if they included non-responders to standard or pegylated IFN and ribavirin therapy. Fourteen trials were included in the meta-analysis. Data on study populations, interventions, and outcomes were extracted from trials using a random-effects model. Primary outcome was the SVR rate., Results: The pooled estimate of SVR rate was 16.3% (95% Confidence Interval - 95% CI, 8.3-29.6%). There was a significant heterogeneity among studies (p<0.0001). Heterogeneity was less apparent in studies that included fewer patients with cirrhosis or overweight. By meta-regression, higher SVR rate was observed in trials with a lower prevalence of subjects with genotype 1 infection and with fewer overweight patients. The use of a 24-week retreatment stopping rule did not affect SVR rate., Conclusions: The overall modest efficacy argues against an indiscriminate retreatment with PEG-IFN and ribavirin of all non-responders. Restricting retreatment to non-overweight patients or to those with genotype 2 or 3 infection, using a 24-week retreatment stopping rule, would optimize the potential benefit with a scarce likelihood of missing a curative response.

Chronic hepatitis C virus infection is currently the most common cause of end stage liver disease worldwide. Although the conclusions of the last National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conferences on Hepatitis C have recently been published, several important issues remain unanswered. This paper reviews the available data using an evidence-based approach. Current evidence is sufficient to recommend IFN treatment for all patients with acute hepatitis. A later initiation of therapy yields the same likelihood of response as early treatment. A daily induction dose during month 1 is the best treatment option. The current gold standard of efficacy for treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C is the combination of pegylated IFN and ribavirin. The overall sustained viral response rate to these regimens is 54 - 56% following a 48-week course of therapy. Patients with genotype 1 infection will have a 42 - 51% likelihood of response to 48weeks of therapy. Those with genotypes 2 or 3 infection will respond to 24weeks in 78 - 82% of cases. Debate continues regarding the optimal dose and duration of peginterferon (PEG-IFN), not only in patients infected with genotype 2 or 3 but also in those infected with genotype 1. The optimal dose of ribavirin has yet to be determined. Available data show the need to give the highest tolerable doses (1000-1200mg/day) to the difficult-to-treat patients (genotype 1, cirrhotics, obese), although there is a greater likelihood of intolerance. Genotypes 2 and 3 may receive 800mg/day, which is also the most appropriate lower dose for those patients who require dosage modification for anaemia or other side effects. Tolerability and compliance to therapy are still a problem, as approximately 15- 20% of patients within trials and > 25% in clinical practice withdraw from therapy. New PEG-IFNs are more effective than conventional IFN in improving liver histology. Monotherapy with PEG-IFN induces a marked reduction in staging in virological sustained responders, and to a lesser degree in relapsers, but provides no benefit to nonresponders after 24-48weeks of treatment. The use of maintenance therapy in virological nonresponders aiming to improve histology should be considered experimental and of unproven benefit. Pooling data from the literature suggests a slight preventive effect of IFN on hepatocellular carcinoma development in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis. The magnitude of this effect is low and the observed benefit may be due to spurious associations. The preventive effect is more evident among sustained responders to IFN.