Search

Standard-of-care HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly efficacious, but uptake of and persistence on a daily oral pill is low in many settings. Evaluation of alternate PrEP products will require innovation to avoid the unpractically large sample sizes in noninferiority trials. We propose estimating HIV incidence in people not on PrEP as an external counterfactual to which on-PrEP incidence in trial subjects can be compared. HIV recent infection testing algorithms (RITAs), such as the limiting antigen avidity assay plus viral load used on specimens from untreated HIV positive people identified during screening, is one possible approach. Its feasibility is partly dependent on the sample size needed to ensure adequate power, which is impacted by RITA performance, the number of recent infections identified, the expected efficacy of the intervention, and other factors. Screening sample sizes to support detection of an 80% reduction in incidence for 3 key populations are more modest, and comparable to the number of participants in recent phase III PrEP trials. Sample sizes would be significantly larger in populations with lower incidence, where the false recency rate is higher or if PrEP efficacy is expected to be lower. Our proposed counterfactual approach appears to be feasible, offers high statistical power, and is nearly contemporaneous with the on-PrEP population. It will be important to monitor the performance of this approach during new product development for HIV prevention. If successful, it could be a model for preventive HIV vaccines and prevention of other infectious diseases.

Background:Islatravir (MK-8591) is a deoxyadenosine analog in development for the treatment and prevention of HIV-1 infection. An islatravir-eluting implant could provide an additional option for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).Setting:Previous data support a threshold islatravir triphosphate concentration for PrEP of 0.05 pmol/10(6) cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Prototype islatravir-eluting implants were previously studied to establish general tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of islatravir relative to the threshold level.Methods:In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial, a next-generation radiopaque islatravir-eluting implant (48 mg, 52 mg, or 56 mg) or placebo implant was placed for a duration of 12 weeks in participants at low risk of HIV infection. Safety and tolerability, as well as PK for islatravir parent and islatravir triphosphate from plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells, were assessed throughout placement and 8 weeks after removal.Results:In total, 36 participants (8 active and 4 placebo per dose arm) were enrolled and completed this study. Implants were generally well tolerated, with no discontinuations due to an adverse event, and no clear dose-dependence in implant-related adverse events. No clinically meaningful relationships were observed for changes in laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiogram assessments. Mean islatravir triphosphate levels at day 85 (0.101-0.561 pmol/10(6) cells) were above the PK threshold for all dose levels.Conclusion:Islatravir administered using a subdermal implant has the potential to be an effective and well-tolerated method for administering PrEP to individuals at risk of acquiring HIV-1.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfection after successful treatment may reduce the benefits of cure among people who inject drugs.To evaluate the rate of HCV reinfection for 3 years after successful treatment among people receiving opioid agonist therapy (OAT).A 3-year, long-term, extension study of persons enrolled in the CO-STAR (Hepatitis C Patients on Opioid Substitution Therapy Antiviral Response) study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105688).55 clinical trial sites in 13 countries.Aged 18 years and older with chronic HCV infection with genotypes 1, 4, or 6 receiving stable OAT.No treatments were administered.Serum samples were assessed for HCV reinfection. Urine drug screening was performed.Among 296 participants who received treatment, 286 were evaluable for reinfection and 199 were enrolled in the long-term extension study. The rate of HCV reinfection was 1.7 [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.0] per 100 person-years; 604 person-years of follow-up). A higher rate of reinfection was seen among people with recent injecting drug use (1.9 [95% CI, 0.5 to 4.8] per 100 person-years; 212 person-years). Ongoing drug use and injecting drug use were reported by 59% and 21% of participants, respectively, at the 6-month follow-up visit and remained stable during 3 years of follow-up.Participants were required to be 80% adherent to OAT at baseline and may represent a population with higher stability and lower risk for HCV reinfection. Rate of reinfection may be underestimated because all participants did not continue in the long-term extension study; whether participants who discontinued were at higher risk for reinfection is unknown.Reinfection with HCV was low but was highest in the first 24 weeks after treatment completion and among people with ongoing injecting drug use and needle-syringe sharing.Merck SharpDohme Corp., a subsidiary of MerckCo., Inc.

Summary Background Islatravir is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase translocation inhibitor in development for the treatment and prevention of HIV-1 infection. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of islatravir-based regimens for the treatment of HIV-1. Methods We did a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, comparator-controlled, dose-ranging trial at 24 clinics or hospitals in four countries (Chile, France, the UK, and the USA). Treatment-naive adults (≥18 years) with plasma HIV-1 RNA concentrations of at least 1000 copies per mL, CD4 T-cell counts of at least 200 cells per mL, and a calculated creatinine clearance of at least 50 mL/min (all within 60 days before study treatment) were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) with a block size of four via an interactive voice and web response system to receive oral treatment with one of three doses of islatravir (0·25 mg, 0·75 mg, or 2·25 mg) plus doravirine (100 mg) and lamivudine (300 mg) or to doravirine (100 mg) plus lamivudine (300 mg) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF; 300 mg) once daily with placebo (part 1). Treatment groups were stratified according to screening HIV-1 RNA concentration (≤100 000 copies per mL or >100 000 copies per mL). After at least 24 weeks of treatment, participants taking islatravir who achieved an HIV-1 RNA concentration lower than 50 copies per mL switched to a two-drug regimen of islatravir and doravirine (part 2). All participants and study investigators were masked to treatment in part 1; in part 2, the islatravir dose was masked to all participants and investigators, but the other drugs were given open label. The primary efficacy outcomes were the proportions of participants with an HIV-1 RNA concentration lower than 50 copies per mL at weeks 24 and 48 (US Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach). The primary safety outcomes were the number of participants experiencing adverse events and the number of participants discontinuing study drug owing to adverse events. All participants who received at least one dose of any study drug were included in the analyses. This trial is ongoing, but closed to enrolment of new participants; herein, we report study findings through 48 weeks of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03272347 . Findings Between Nov 27, 2017, and April 25, 2019, 121 participants (mean age 31 years [SD 10·9], 112 [93%] male, 92 [76%] white, 27 [22%] with HIV-1 RNA concentration >100 000 copies per mL) were randomly assigned: 29 to the 0·25 mg, 30 to the 0·75 mg, and 31 to the 2·25 mg islatravir groups, and 31 to the doravirine, lamivudine, and TDF group. At week 24, 26 (90%) of 29 participants in the 0·25 mg islatravir group, 30 (100%) of 30 in the 0·75 mg islatravir group, and 27 (87%) of 31 in the 2·25 mg islatravir group achieved HIV-1 RNA concentrations lower than 50 copies per mL compared with 27 (87%) of 31 in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group (difference 2·8%, 95% CI –14·9 to 20·4, for the 0·25 mg islatravir group; 12·9%, –1·6 to 27·5, for the 0·75 mg islatravir group; and 0·3%, –17·9 to 18·5, for the 2·25 mg islatravir group). At week 48, these data were 26 (90%) of 29 in the 0·25 mg islatravir group, 27 (90%) of 30 in the 0·75 mg islatravir group, and 24 (77%) of 31 in the 2·25 mg islatravir group compared with 26 (84%) of 31 in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group (difference 6·1%, 95% CI –12·4 to 24·4, for the 0·25 mg islatravir group; 6·2%, –12·2 to 24·6, for the 0·75 mg islatravir group; and –6·1%, –27·1 to 14·8, for the 2·75 mg islatravir group). 66 (73%) of participants in the islatravir groups combined and 24 (77%) of those in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group reported at least one adverse event. Two participants in the 2·25 mg islatravir group and one participant in the doravirine plus lamivudine plus TDF group discontinued owing to an adverse event. No deaths were reported up to week 48. Interpretation Treatment regimens containing islatravir and doravirine showed antiviral efficacy and were well tolerated regardless of dose. Doravirine in combination with islatravir has the potential to be a potent two-drug regimen that warrants further clinical development. Funding Merck, Sharp, & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.

Direct-acting antiviral treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are generally safe; however, understanding the safety profile of each regimen is essential for their continued use. Safety data were pooled from 12 clinical trials of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) that enrolled adult participants with HCV infection. Pooled analyses are presented for participants receiving EBR/GZR for 12 weeks and those receiving EBR/GZR plus ribavirin (RBV) for 16-18 weeks. Safety data are also presented for participants with comorbidities receiving EBR/GZR for 12 weeks in individual clinical trials (chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage 4/5, inherited blood disorders [IBLD] or receiving opioid agonist therapy [OAT]). Among 1743 participants receiving EBR/GZR for 12 weeks, 1068 (61.3%) reported ≥1 adverse event (AE) and 491 had AEs (28.2%) considered drug-related. The most frequent AEs were headache (10.6%), fatigue (8.7%), nasopharyngitis (5.8%), nausea (5.1%) and diarrhoea (5.0%). Serious AEs were reported by 37 participants (2.1%), and 12 (0.7%) discontinued treatment due to an AE. In populations with CKD 4/5 or IBLD or receiving OAT, safety was similar in participants receiving EBR/GZR for 12 weeks and those receiving placebo. Some AEs occurred at higher frequencies in participants receiving RBV compared with those receiving EBR/GZR alone: fatigue (32.7% vs 8.7%); headache (21.6% vs 10.6%); and nausea (15.8% vs 5.1%). Safety was similar in participants with and those without cirrhosis. Grade 3/4 alanine aminotransferase elevations were reported in 0.7% participants. EBR/GZR is a safe treatment option for individuals with HCV genotype (GT) 1 or GT4 infections, even those with challenging comorbidities such as CKD or IBLD and those receiving OAT.

Background and Aim In China, clinical experience with direct‐acting antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is still emerging. C‐CORAL is a phase 3, multinational, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind trial of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in participants with HCV infection from the Asia‐Pacific region and Russia. Here, we report the data from participants enrolled in China. Methods Treatment‐naive participants with chronic HCV genotype (GT) 1, GT4, or GT6 infection were randomly assigned to receive 50 mg EBR/100 mg GZR for 12 weeks (immediate‐treatment group, ITG) or placebo followed by deferred treatment with EBR/GZR (deferred‐treatment group, DTG). The primary efficacy end‐point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after completing treatment (SVR12), and the primary safety end‐point was a comparison of safety between participants receiving EBR/GZR and placebo (NCT02251990; Protocol PN‐5172‐067). Results A total of 152 participants in China were randomly assigned (ITG, n = 115; DTG, n = 37). SVR12 was achieved in 96.7% (146/151) participants overall and in 97.3% (142/146) of those with GT1b infection. Four participants relapsed (GT1b, n = 3; GT6a, n = 1). Drug‐related AEs were reported in 25 (21.7%) and 9 (24.3%) participants receiving EBR/GZR and placebo, respectively; no drug‐related serious adverse events (AEs) occurred. Two (1.7%) participants receiving EBR/GZR had late hepatic transaminase elevations. Patient‐reported outcomes indicate improved quality of life at follow‐up week 4 in participants receiving EBR/GZR compared to placebo. Conclusion EBR/GZR administered for 12 weeks represents a highly effective and safe treatment option for Chinese individuals with HCV GT1 infection., A sustained virologic response was achieved by 96.7% (146/151) of treatment‐naive participants with hepatitis c virus infection receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir (50 mg/100 mg) for 12 weeks. Patient‐reported outcomes indicate improved quality of life following clearance of HCV.

Islatravir (MK-8591) is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase translocation inhibitor in development for treatment and prevention of HIV-1. We present efficacy and safety data for islatravir and doravirine (DOR) through 96 weeks of the phase 2b trial (NCT03272347).In this randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging trial, participants initially received islatravir (0.25, 0.75, or 2.25 mg) with doravirine (100 mg) and lamivudine (3TC, 300 mg) or a fixed-dose combination of doravirine, 3TC, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DOR/3TC/TDF) daily. Beginning at week 24, participants receiving islatravir stopped 3TC if HIV-1 RNA from the prior visit was50 copies per milliliter and continued taking the assigned islatravir dose (still blinded) with doravirine. All islatravir groups transitioned to open-label use of 0.75 mg between weeks 60 and 84. Efficacy end points at week 96 included the proportion of participants maintaining HIV-1 RNA of50 copies per milliliter (FDA Snapshot). Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting.One hundred twenty-one treatment-naive participants received the study drugs and were included in the analyses. Through week 96, HIV-1 RNA50 copies per milliliter was maintained in 86.2% (25/29), 90.0% (27/30), and 67.7% (21/31) of participants in the 0.25-, 0.75-, and 2.25-mg islatravir groups, respectively, 81.1% (73/90) of the combined islatravir group, and 80.6% (25/31) of the DOR/3TC/TDF group. One participant in the 2.25-mg islatravir group had Protocol-Defined Virologic Failure after week 48. Drug-related AE rates were higher for DOR/3TC/TDF participants (22.6%) compared with islatravir (combined 7.8%). Two participants (2.2%) receiving islatravir with doravirine and one (3.2%) receiving DOR/3TC/TDF discontinued because of an AE.Treatment regimens containing islatravir and doravirine maintained viral suppression through week 96 and were well tolerated regardless of dose.

Introduction Some direct-acting antiviral regimens for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection pose safety or efficacy concerns if coadministered with drugs containing ethinyl estradiol. The present analysis was conducted to examine the impact of concomitant oral contraceptive pills (OCP) or hormone replacement therapy (HRT) during treatment with elbasvir (EBR)/grazoprevir (GZR) in women with HCV genotype (GT)1 or GT4 infection. Methods This is a post hoc, integrated retrospective analysis of female participants with HCV GT1 or GT4 infection who received EBR 50 mg/GZR 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks in phase 2/3 clinical trials. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after therapy completion (SVR12). For this analysis, participants were stratified according to whether they received OCP or HRT during the original treatment study. Results A total of 1,022 women with HCV GT1 or GT4 infection were included (receiving OCP/HRT, n=81; not receiving OCP/HRT, n=941). Most participants receiving OCP/HRT were treatment-naive (79%), noncirrhotic (91.4%), and aged >35 years (71.6%). SVR12 rates were similar in women receiving OCP/HRT and those not receiving OCP/HRT (95.1% vs 96.3%). SVR12 rates remained high across all subgroups within the population receiving OCP/HRT: SVR12 rates were 94.6%, 100%, and 100% in participants with GT1a, GT1b, and GT4 infection, and all women aged 18-35 years achieved SVR (21/21). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 40.7% (33/81) and 30.1% (283/941) of women receiving and those not receiving OCP/HRT, respectively. Conclusion The efficacy and safety of EBR/GZR administered for 12 weeks was similar in women receiving OCP/HRT and those not on OCP/HRT. These data indicate that EBR/GZR can be safely used for the treatment of HCV GT1 or GT4 infection in women receiving concomitant OCP/HRT.

Aim: To evaluate the effect of SLCO1B1 genetic variants on grazoprevir pharmacokinetics and efficacy. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 1578 hepatitis C virus-infected participants from ten Phase II/III clinical trials. Results: Relative to noncarriers of the risk allele, geometric mean ratios (95% CI) of grazoprevir area under curve (AUC)0–24 were: rs4149056 (risk allele C), one copy, 1.13 (1.06–1.21), two copies, 1.43 (1.16–1.77); and rs11045819 (risk allele A), one copy, 0.93 (0.87–1.00); two copies, 0.78 (0.61–1.00). The rs2306283 variant was not associated with grazoprevir exposure. None of the SLCO1B1 variants were associated with sustained virologic response. Conclusion: Genetic variants in SLCO1B1 were associated with modest changes in grazoprevir pharmacokinetics, but not with meaningful differences in efficacy.

European treatment guidelines for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection recommend that people with genotype (GT) 1a infection and baseline viral load ≤800 000 IU/mL receive elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for 12 weeks, and those with baseline viral load >800 000 IU/mL receive EBR/GZR plus ribavirin for 16 weeks. This analysis was conducted to clarify whether baseline viral load can serve as an accurate, sensitive or specific stratification factor for defining EBR/GZR regimens. In this post hoc, integrated analysis, participants with GT1a infection who received EBR 50 mg/GZR 100 mg for 12 weeks were stratified according to baseline viral load. Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks post-treatment was achieved by 95.2% (911/957) of participants and was higher among participants with baseline viral load ≤800 000 IU/mL vs >800 000 IU/mL (98.5% vs 93.9%). The 800 000 IU/mL threshold had a positive predictive value of 98.5%, a negative predictive value of 6.1%, a specificity of 91.3%, a sensitivity of 28.4% and an overall accuracy of 31.5%. A baseline viral load cutpoint of 800 000 IU/mL had high positive predictive value and specificity but poor negative predictive value, sensitivity and accuracy in predicting treatment outcomes in this population. Baseline NS5A resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) were detected in 25% (1/4) of virologic failures with baseline viral load ≤800 000 IU/mL and 59.5% (25/42) of those with baseline viral load >800 000 IU/mL. Overall, these data suggest that, compared with the use of a baseline viral load cutpoint, baseline testing for NS5A RASs enables more individuals to receive the 12-week EBR/GZR regimen without compromising the opportunity for SVR.

International audience; Background & Aims Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 4 infection is prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, particularly in Egypt. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir administered for 8 and 12 weeks in participants with HCV GT4 infection. Methods In this partially randomized, open-label multicentre study conducted in France (NCT03111108; Protocol MK5172-096), treatment-naive participants with GT4 infection and F0-F2 fibrosis were randomized 2:1 to elbasvir (50 mg)/grazoprevir (100 mg) for 8 or 12 weeks. Treatment-naive participants with F3-F4 fibrosis and all treatment-experienced participants (F0-F4) were assigned to elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response (SVR) 12 weeks after the end of therapy. Results One hundred and seventeen participants were enrolled. Among treatment-naive participants with F0-F2 fibrosis, SVR was achieved by 94% (50/53) and 96% (26/27) of those receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 8 or 12 weeks, respectively, and four participants relapsed. In the 12-week arm, 95% (35/37) achieved SVR and two participants relapsed. NS5A resistance-associated substitutions were present at baseline and virologic failure in five of the participants with relapse. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 42% (n = 22) and 50% (n = 32) of participants receiving 8 and 12 weeks of treatment, respectively. No participant discontinued treatment owing to an adverse event. Conclusion These data confirm the efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir administered for 12 weeks in treatment-experienced individuals with HCV GT4 infection and those with advanced fibrosis. Treatment-naive individuals with mild fibrosis can be treated effectively with an 8-week regimen.

Background: In the United States, the number of new cases of hepatitis C virus infection has risen in recent years, driven largely by transmission among young white adults in their 20s and 30s. Herein, we report an integrated analysis of participants with hepatitis C virus infection aged ≤35 years from 12 phase II/III clinical trials of elbasvir/grazoprevir. Methods: Treatment-naive and -experienced adults with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 or 4 infection received elbasvir (50 mg/day)/grazoprevir (100 mg/day) for 12 weeks without ribavirin. Analyses were stratified according to participant age (≤35 years vs >35 years). The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response (hepatitis C virus RNA Results: Sustained virologic response was achieved by 98.9% (271/274) of participants aged ≤35 years and by 96.9% (2093/2160) aged >35 years. Three participants aged ≤35 years with genotype 1b infection relapsed. Eight participants with genotype 1a infection and baseline non-structural protein 5 A resistance-associated substitutions achieved sustained virologic response. Similarly, all 85 participants aged ≤35 years with genotype 1a infection and no baseline non-structural protein 5 A resistance-associated substitutions achieved sustained virologic response. Safety was favorable, with the incidence of drug-related adverse events similar in younger and older participants (30.1% vs 30.6%). One participant (0.4%) aged ≤35 years and 15 participants (0.7%) aged >35 years discontinued treatment owing to adverse events. Conclusions: Elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks was safe and highly effective in participants aged ≤35 years with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 or 4 infection.

The prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Asian countries is high. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in participants with HCV infection from Asia-Pacific countries and Russia. In this phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, treatment-naive participants with HCV genotype (GT) 1, 4, or 6 infection were randomized to EBR 50 mg/GZR 100 mg (immediate-treatment group [ITG]) or placebo (deferred-treatment group [DTG]) once daily for 12 weeks (Protocol PN-5172-067, NCT02251990). The primary efficacy variable was a nonrandomized comparison of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12) for the ITG with a historical control. The primary safety outcome was a randomized comparison between the ITG and DTG. Three hundred thirty-seven participants were randomized to the ITG (n = 251) or DTG (n = 86); 199 (59.2%) participants were Asian, and 250 (74.4%) had HCV GT1b infection. Overall, 232/250 (92.8%) participants in the ITG achieved SVR12 (97.5% confidence interval, 89.1, 96.5). Of the 18 participants who failed to attain SVR12, 1 was lost to follow-up and 17 had virologic failure, 13 of whom had HCV GT6 infection. The incidence of adverse events was similar between participants receiving EBR/GZR and placebo (50.8% versus 51.2%; difference, -0.3%; 95% confidence interval, -12.3, 11.9). Conclusion: EBR/GZR for 12 weeks provides an effective and well-tolerated regimen for chronic HCV GT1 infection in treatment-naive people from Asia-Pacific countries and Russia, particularly for the large population with GT1b infection. EBR/GZR is not recommended for the treatment of individuals with HCV GT6 infection. (Hepatology Communications 2018;2:595-606).

Genotype 1b (GT1b) is the most common subtype of the hepatitis C virus (HCV). We present an integrated analysis of 1070 participants with HCV GT1b infection from 30 countries who received elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks.This is a retrospective analysis of data from participants with chronic HCV GT1b infection enrolled in 11 phase II/III clinical trials. All participants received elbasvir 50 mg plus grazoprevir 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary end point of all studies was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12, HCV RNA 15 IU/ml).SVR12 was 97.2% (1040/1070). Of the 30 participants who failed to attain SVR12, 15 relapsed and 15 had nonvirologic failure. Among participant subgroups, SVR12 was high in those with compensated cirrhosis (188/189, 99.5%), HIV co-infection (51/54, 94.4%), and baseline viral load 800,000 IU/ml (705/728, 96.8%). Resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) at NS5A positions 28, 30, 31, or 93 were present in 21.6% of participants at baseline. SVR12 was 99.6% (820/823) in participants without baseline NS5A RASs and 94.7% (215/227) in those with baseline NS5A RASs. Serious adverse events occurred in 3.2% (34/1070) of participants, nine of which occurred after study medication was completed.Elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks represents an effective treatment option for participants with HCV GT1b infection. SVR12 was high in all participant subgroups, including those with compensated cirrhosis, HIV co-infection, and high baseline viral load. CLINICALTRIALS.The trials discussed in this paper were registered with Clinicaltrial.gov as the following: NCT02092350 (C-SURFER), NCT02105662 (C-EDGE Co-Infection), NCT02105467 (C-EDGE treatment-naive), NCT02105701 (C-EDGE treatment-experienced), NCT01717326 (C-WORTHy), NCT02251990 (C-CORAL), NCT02105688 (C-EDGE COSTAR), NCT02252016 (C-EDGE IBLD), NCT02115321 (C-SALT), NCT02203149 (Japan phase 2/3 study), NCT02358044 (C-EDGE Head-2-Head).

Concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use reduces plasma concentrations of certain nonstructural protein 5A inhibitors, which are key components of modern hepatitis C infection (HCV) treatments. These reduced concentrations may decrease efficacy, leading to challenging treatment failures due to the development of resistance-associated substitutions. This post-hoc analysis assessed 12-week sustained viral response (SVR12) and pharmacokinetics of fixed-dose combination elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in patients with HCV infection and self-reported PPI use. Data were derived from six phase 3 EBR/GZR trials with treatment-naive or treatment-experienced genotype 1- or 4-infected patients, with or without compensated cirrhosis. Baseline PPI use was defined as ≥7 consecutive days of use between study days -7 and 7. Bivariate analyses assessed PPI use and factors associated with SVR12 with sex, age (continuous and dichotomous), cirrhosis status, prior treatment status, baseline HCV RNA (continuous and dichotomous), HCV genotype, and baseline resistance-associated substitutions as variables in the models. Overall, 12% (162/1,322) of EBR/GZR-treated patients reported baseline PPI use. Of those, 96% achieved SVR12. In patients without PPI use, 97% achieved SVR12. PPI use was not a predictive factor in achieving SVR12 based on a univariate analysis (P = 0.188). In the bivariate models, none of the interaction terms involving PPI use were statistically significant. There was no significant effect of PPI usage, regardless of adjustment for considered factors. The estimated area under the curve and maximum concentration values for EBR were comparable among patients with and without reported PPI use. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that PPI use with EBR/GZR had no clinically significant effect on SVR12 rates in genotype 1/4-infected patients with or without compensated cirrhosis. (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02092350, NCT02105467, NCT02105662, NCT02105688, NCT02105701, NCT02358044) (Hepatology Communications 2017;1:757-764).

Christophe Hézode,1 Paul Kwo,2 Jan Sperl,3 Peggy Hwang,4 Jianmin Long,4 Rohit Talwani,4 Michael N Robertson,4 Barbara A Haber4 1Service d’Hépatologie, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, AP-HP, Université Paris-Est, INSERM U955, Créteil, France; 2Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA; 3Department of Hepatogastroenterology, Institut Klinické a Experimentální Medicíny (IKEM), Prague, Czech Republic; 4Department of Infectious Disease, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USACorrespondence: Christophe HézodeService d’Hepatologie, Hôpital Henri Mondor, 51, avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil 94010, FranceTel +33 14 981 2111Email christophe.hezode@aphp.frIntroduction: Some direct-acting antiviral regimens for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection pose safety or efficacy concerns if coadministered with drugs containing ethinyl estradiol. The present analysis was conducted to examine the impact of concomitant oral contraceptive pills (OCP) or hormone replacement therapy (HRT) during treatment with elbasvir (EBR)/grazoprevir (GZR) in women with HCV genotype (GT)1 or GT4 infection.Methods: This is a post hoc, integrated retrospective analysis of female participants with HCV GT1 or GT4 infection who received EBR 50mg/GZR 100mg once daily for 12weeks in phase 2/3 clinical trials. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12weeks after therapy completion (SVR12). For this analysis, participants were stratified according to whether they received OCP or HRT during the original treatment study.Results: A total of 1,022 women with HCV GT1 or GT4 infection were included (receiving OCP/HRT, n=81; not receiving OCP/HRT, n=941). Most participants receiving OCP/HRT were treatment-naive (79%), noncirrhotic (91.4%), and aged >35years (71.6%). SVR12 rates were similar in women receiving OCP/HRT and those not receiving OCP/HRT (95.1% vs 96.3%). SVR12 rates remained high across all subgroups within the population receiving OCP/HRT: SVR12 rates were 94.6%, 100%, and 100% in participants with GT1a, GT1b, and GT4 infection, and all women aged 18–35years achieved SVR (21/21). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 40.7% (33/81) and 30.1% (283/941) of women receiving and those not receiving OCP/HRT, respectively.Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of EBR/GZR administered for 12weeks was similar in women receiving OCP/HRT and those not on OCP/HRT. These data indicate that EBR/GZR can be safely used for the treatment of HCV GT1 or GT4 infection in women receiving concomitant OCP/HRT.Keywords: clinical trial, ethinyl estradiol, levonorgestrel, NS5A inhibitor, NS3/4A protease inhibitor

INTRODUCTION: Treatment options are limited for people infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) with decompensated liver disease. The C-SALT study assessed elbasvir (EBR) plus grazoprevir (GZR) in individuals with HCV genotype 1 infection and Child-Pugh class B (CP-B) cirrhosis. METHODS: In this 12-week, phase 2, nonrandomized, open-label study (NCT02115321; Protocol MK-5172-059), participants with CP-B cirrhosis received EBR 50 mg plus GZR 50 mg once daily, and a control group of noncirrhotic participants received EBR 50 mg plus GZR 100 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy was achieved by 27/30 (90.0%) CP-B participants and 10/10 (100.0%) noncirrhotic participants. Two participants relapsed, and one died during follow-up after having undetectable HCV RNA at the end of treatment. Most CP-B participants had stable or improved model for end-stage liver disease and Child-Pugh scores at follow-up week 12 compared with baseline. There was no significant difference in drug exposure between groups, despite the differing GZR dose. Adverse events occurring in >10% of participants were fatigue (CP-B: 30.0%; noncirrhotic: 30.0%), arthralgia (16.7%; 20.0%), nausea (10.0%; 20.0%), and headache (10.0%; 50.0%). No serious treatment-related adverse events or hepatic events of clinical interest occurred. CONCLUSIONS: EBR 50 mg plus GZR 50 mg once daily for 12 weeks was highly effective and well tolerated in a traditionally hard-to-treat population. TRANSLATIONAL IMPACT: Although EBR plus reduced-dose GZR is not available for people with CP-B cirrhosis, these results complement phase 2/3 trial data and real-world experience with EBR/GZR.

Ruzasvir (MK-8408, an NS5A inhibitor) and uprifosbuvir (MK-3682, a nonstructural protein 5B nucleotide inhibitor) are highly potent direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. A phase III clinical trial evaluating the two-drug combination of ruzasvir 60 mg plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg suggested suboptimal efficacy in certain HCV genotypes (C-BREEZE 1; NCT02759315). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruzasvir in combination with uprifosbuvir administered at a higher dose than that assessed in the earlier study (C-BREEZE 2: NCT02956629/Merck protocol PN041). Treatment-naive or interferon (with or without ribavirin)-experienced participants with or without compensated cirrhosis were enrolled. All participants received ruzasvir 180 mg plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary objectives were the proportion of participants with HCV RNA

ZEPATIER® (MK-5172A; elbasvir and grazoprevir, Merck & Co., Inc.) is a fixed-dose combination treatment for individuals with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. This novel direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimen combines elbasvir, a selective inhibitor of the HCV nonstructural protein 5A, and grazoprevir, a reversible competitive inhibitor of the HCV nonstructural protein 3/4A protease. After extensive preclinical testing and evaluation of safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) in healthy volunteers, the efficacy of these agents was evaluated in a systematic and comprehensive clinical development program culminating in phase 3 clinical trials in a broad population of participants with HCV infection, including treatment-naive and treatment-experienced participants, those with chronic kidney disease or inherited blood disorders, and those receiving opioid agonist therapy. These studies led to the approval of the elbasvir/grazoprevir combination therapy for the treatment of people with HCV genotype 1 or genotype 4 infection in the United States, Europe, Canada, and many other countries worldwide.

Background: In elderly individuals aged ≥65 years with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, efficacious and safe HCV therapy is complicated by frequent comorbidities and concomitant medications. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in people aged ≥65 years. Methods: This is an integrated retrospective analysis of EBR/GZR administered for 12 weeks in participants with HCV genotype 1 or 4 infection enrolled in 12 Phase 2/3 clinical trials. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completing therapy (SVR12; HCV RNA below the lower limit of quantification). Results: Most participants aged ≥65 years were receiving ≥1 concomitant medication (322/339; 95.0%) and had ≥1 comorbidity (334/339; 99%). SVR12 rates were 95.3% (323/339) in participants aged ≥65 years and 95.4% (2,041/2,139) in those aged

Background Elbasvir (EBR) in combination with grazoprevir (GZR) has demonstrated efficacy in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections in trials primarily conducted in the USA and Europe. We investigated the safety and efficacy of EBR in combination with GZR in Japanese patients with chronic HCV infection, with or without cirrhosis. Methods The study was conducted in two parts. In part 1, noncirrhotic patients were randomized 1:1 to receive EBR (50 mg) in combination with GZR (50 or 100 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. In part 2, noncirrhotic patients were randomized 3:1 to receive immediate or deferred treatment with EBR (50 mg) and GZR (100 mg, determined in part 1) for 12 weeks; cirrhotic patients received open-label immediate treatment. The primary efficacy end point was the rate of sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completion of the study treatment. Results In part 1, 63 patients were randomized to receive EBR in combination with GZR at a dose of 50 mg (n = 31) or 100 mg (n = 32). The SVR12 rates were 100% with GZR at a dose of 50 mg and 96.8% with GZR at a dose of 100 mg. Tolerability was similar in both arms. In part 2, 301 noncirrhotic patients were randomized to receive immediate treatment (n = 227) or deferred treatment (n = 74), and 35 cirrhotic patients were enrolled. The SVR12 rates were 96.5% and 97.1% after immediate treatment in noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients respectively. Safety was generally similar between immediate and deferred treatment. Conclusion Treatment with EBR in combination with GZR for 12 weeks is effective and well tolerated in Japanese patients with chronic HCV infection. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02203149. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00535-016-1285-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background and aim Estimates suggest that in Asia, more than 31 million individuals have hepatitis C virus infection. The present analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir in Asian participants enrolled in the elbasvir/grazoprevir phase 2/3 clinical trials. Methods This is an integrated analysis of data from 12 international phase 2/3 clinical trials. Asian participants with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 or 4 infection who received elbasvir 50 mg/grazoprevir 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks or elbasvir/grazoprevir plus ribavirin for 16 weeks were included in this analysis. The primary end point was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12). Results Seven hundred eighty Asian participants from 15 countries were included in this analysis. SVR12 was achieved by 756/780 (96.9%) of all participants, including 748/772 (96.9%) of those who received elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks and 8/8 (100%) of those who received elbasvir/grazoprevir plus ribavirin for 16 weeks. In the genotype 1b-infected population, the SVR12 rate was 691/709 (97.5%), and there was no impact of age, high baseline viral load, or presence of cirrhosis. The most frequently reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis (8.0%), upper respiratory tract infection (5.4%), and diarrhea (5.2%). Twenty participants receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks reported a total of 25 serious adverse events, and 7 (0.9%) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Conclusion Elbasvir/grazoprevir administered for 12 weeks is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment option for Asian individuals with hepatitis C virus genotype 1b infection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM Although treatment with direct-acting antivirals has dramatically improved morbidity and mortality attributable to chronic hepatitis C virus infection, universal access to these medicines has been slow in the Asia-Pacific region and Russia. This study evaluated efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir in participants with hepatitis C virus infection from Asia-Pacific countries and Russia (C-CORAL). METHODS C-CORAL was a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study (NCT02251990). Treatment-naive, HIV-negative, cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic participants with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection were randomized to elbasvir 50 mg/grazoprevir 100 mg once daily for 12 weeks (immediate-treatment group) or placebo followed by deferred treatment with elbasvir/grazoprevir (deferred-treatment group). The primary efficacy outcome was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks, and the primary safety outcome was a comparison between the immediate-treatment group and placebo phase of the deferred-treatment group. RESULTS A total of 489 participants were randomized (immediate-treatment group, n = 366; deferred-treatment group, n = 123). Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks in the combined immediate/deferred-treatment groups was 94.4% (459/486; 95% confidence interval = 92.4-96.5%). Sustained virologic response at 12 weeks was 98.2% in participants with genotype 1b, 91.9% with genotype 1a, and 66.7% with genotype 6 infection. Similar rates of adverse events and drug-related adverse events were seen in the immediate-treatment group versus placebo phase of the deferred-treatment group (51.0% vs 50.4% and 21.4% vs 21.1%). CONCLUSIONS Elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks represents an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for treatment-naive people with genotype 1 infection from Asia-Pacific countries and Russia.

In clinical trials, the three-drug regimen of ruzasvir (RZR) 60 mg, uprifosbuvir (UPR) 450 mg and grazoprevir 100 mg, with or without ribavirin, has demonstrated promising efficacy and excellent tolerability across a wide range of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected individuals. The present study assessed the efficacy and safety of the two-drug combination of RZR 60 mg plus UPR 450 mg administered for 12 weeks in participants with HCV genotype (GT) 1-6 infection. In this open-label clinical trial, treatment-naive or -experienced and cirrhotic or noncirrhotic participants with chronic HCV GT1-6 infection received RZR 60 mg plus UPR 450 mg orally once daily for 12 weeks (NCT02759315/protocol PN035). The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). One hundred and sixty participants were enrolled. SVR12 rates were 96% (52 of 54) in participants with GT1a infection; 100% (15 of 15) in those with GT1b infection; 97% (28 of 29) in those with GT2 infection; 77% (30 of 39) in those with GT3 infection; 90% (18 of 20) in those with GT4 infection; and 67% (2 of 3) in those with GT6 infection. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) reported by >5% of participants were fatigue (n = 10, 6.3%) and diarrhoea (n = 9, 5.6%). Five participants reported a total of 11 serious AEs, none considered drug-related. One participant experienced on-treatment alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase elevations that resolved without intervention. Data from the present study indicate that the combination of RZR 60 mg plus UPR 450 mg once daily for 12 weeks was well tolerated overall but was effective only for certain genotypes.

Background In HCV-infected people who fail to achieve sustained virological response after receiving a direct-acting antiviral regimen, virological failure is almost always accompanied by the presence of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) in the target protein(s). The aim of this long-term observational study was to evaluate the persistence of NS3/4A and NS5A RASs in participants with genotype (GT) 1 infection who relapsed following treatment with a grazoprevir-containing treatment regimen. Methods RASs were evaluated at baseline (that is, pre-dose on day 1 of the original treatment), at the time of virological failure, and up to follow-up week 96. A total of 58 participants were included. Results In participants treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir ± ribavirin, observed baseline NS3 RASs included 56F, 80K/L, 122N and 170V/I, and observed treatment-emergent NS3 RASs included 36M, 56F/H, 122G, 132I, 156G/I/L/P/T, 168A/E/G/V/Y and 170T. Observed baseline NS5A RASs included 28M/T/V, 30H/R, 31M/V and 93H/N, and treatment-emergent NS5A RASs included 28A/G/S/T, 30H/R, 31M/V and 93H/N/S. Baseline NS3 and NS5A RASs present at time of failure tended to persist during follow-up, and most were detectable for more than 2 years following virological failure. Treatment-emergent NS5A RASs present at time of failure also tended to persist for more than 2 years following virological failure (93%). By contrast, >80% of treatment-emergent NS3 RASs detected at failure had been supplanted by wild type by week 36. Conclusions Treatment-emergent NS5A RASs can persist for extended periods of time. Retreatment strategies should take account of the presence of these RASs.

BACKGROUND: The fixed-dose combination of EBR 50 mg, an NS5A inhibitor, and GZR 100 mg, an NS3/4 protease inhibitor (EBR/GZR), is a highly effective and well-tolerated all-oral, once-daily regimen in diverse populations of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT)1-, 4-, or 6-infected patients, including PWID on OAT. However, data on HCV reinfection rates after successful treatment are limited. AIMS: To determing the rate of reinfections following sucessful HCV therapy with EBR and GZR in PWID receiving OAT METHODS: The double-blind, placebo-controlled CO-STAR study evaluated the efficacy of EBR/GZR for 12 weeks in treatment-naïve HCV GT1-/4-/6-infected patients receiving OAT. Patients were randomized 2:1 to an immediate treatment group (ITG) or a deferred treatment group. HCV reinfection was evaluated among ITG patients with undetectable HCV RNA at end of treatment (EOT). In patients with recurrent viremia following EOT, population sequencing and phylogenetic analysis were performed on baseline and post-treatment samples to distinguish relapse from reinfection. RESULTS: Three hundred one patients were randomized, with 201 in the ITG (76% GT1a; 20% cirrhotic; 8% HIV+). Baseline OAT included methadone (81%) and buprenorphine (19%), and 46% had detectable illicit drugs, excluding marijuana. Post-treatment viremia was detected in 18 patients, with 12 virologic failures and 6 probable reinfections (5 through follow-up week (FW)12 and 1 at FW24). Three patients identified as reinfections had subsequent clearance of HCV RNA. Estimated reinfection incidence per 100 person-years from EOT through FW12 is 10.5 (95% CI: 3.42, 24.6), and from EOT through FW24 is 3.4 (95% CI: 1.3,7.5). Follow-up analysis to determine if any probable reinfections were due to relapse of nondominant baseline variants rather than reinfection will be presented. CONCLUSIONS: Several HCV reinfection cases were detected among PWID on OAT following successful EBR/GZR therapy. Further follow-up is required to determine the natural course of HCV reinfection in the setting of interferon-free HCV treatment and the impact of viral persistence following reinfection on long-term response rates in this population. FUNDING AGENCIES: Merck Pharmaceuticals

International Liver Congress (ILC) of the European-Association-for-the-Study-of-the-Liver (EASL), Paris, FRANCE, APR 11-15, 2018; International audience

Background & aims The aim of this integrated analysis was to assess the efficacy of the once-daily combination of elbasvir 50 mg and grazoprevir 100 mg, with and without ribavirin in HCV genotype 4 (GT4)-infected participants enrolled in the Phase 2/3 clinical programme with elbasvir/grazoprevir. Methods Treatment-naive and treatment-experienced participants 18 years of age or older with chronic HCV GT4 infection and baseline HCV RNA ≥10 000 IU/mL were included in the analysis. The analysis population was the full analysis set (FAS; all participants who received at least 1 dose of study medication) and a total of 155 HCV GT4 participants were evaluated. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at week 12 (SVR12; HCV RNA less than the lower limit of quantitation at 12 weeks after the completion of study therapy). Results Overall, among GT4-infected participants treated with 12 or 16 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir ± ribavirin, the SVR12 efficacy rates were 96.4% (107/111) in treatment-naive participants and 88.6% (39/44) in treatment-experienced participants. The SVR12 rates were 96.0% (97/101) in treatment-naive participants treated with 12 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir and 100% (8/8) in treatment-experienced participants treated with 16 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir plus ribavirin. Efficacy was not impacted by GT4 subtype. Conclusions The regimens of 12 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir without ribavirin, and 16 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir plus ribavirin, were efficacious in HCV GT4-infected treatment-naive and treatment-experienced participants respectively. Baseline NS5A resistance-associated substitutions did not impact the efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir in GT4-infected participants.

BACKGROUND The phase 2 C-SALVAGE study (Hepatitis C-Salvage Study for Patients who Failed DAA/PR Therapy) demonstrated a 96.2% sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12) rate using the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir and the NS5A inhibitor elbasvir together with ribavirin in treatment-experienced patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection. METHODS C-SALVAGE was a prospective open-label trial of grazoprevir 100 mg once daily and elbasvir 50 mg once daily coadministered with weight-based ribavirin twice daily for 12 weeks in genotype 1-infected cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients who had failed treatment with ≥ 4 weeks of pegylated interferon and ribavirin plus either boceprevir, telaprevir, or simeprevir. Although the primary efficacy outcome was SVR12, patients were also evaluated 24 weeks after cessation of study therapy. Population sequencing was performed at baseline and periodically in virologic failures throughout the 24-week posttherapy follow-up period. RESULTS SVR24 rates were 76 of 79 (96.2%) overall, with all 3 relapses occurring by posttherapy week 8. Every NS3 and NS5A variant detected at baseline reappeared at the time of relapse and persisted throughout the available follow-up period. NS3_A156T emerged in virus from each patient at relapse, but rapidly disappeared over the ensuing 2 weeks in 2 patients. NS5A_Y93H emerged in virus from 2 patients at relapse and persisted for the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS Grazoprevir and elbasvir with ribavirin for 12 weeks maintained HCV suppression for at least 24 weeks posttherapy without late relapses. Baseline resistance-associated variants (RAVs) stably reappeared at relapse in all 3 patients with virologic failure. NS5A_RAVs emerging at relapse persisted for the full 24-week follow-up period. If confirmed, this finding could complicate retreatment of the small number of patients failing regimens containing an NS5A inhibitor. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NCT02105454.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with HIV-1. The C-EDGE CO-INFECTION study assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of grazoprevir (MK-5172) plus elbasvir (MK-8742) in patients with HCV and HIV co-infection.In this uncontrolled, non-randomised, phase 3, open-label, single-arm study, treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection and HIV co-infection, with or without cirrhosis, were enrolled from 37 centres in nine countries across Europe, the USA, and Australia. Patients were either naive to treatment with any antiretroviral therapy (ART) or stable on ART for at least 8 weeks. All patients received grazoprevir 100 mg plus elbasvir 50 mg in a fixed-dose combination tablet once daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response (HCV RNA15 IU/mL) 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). The primary population for efficacy analyses was all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02105662.Between June 11, 2014, and Aug 29, 2014, 218 patients were enrolled and received grazoprevir plus elbasvir for 12 weeks, all of whom completed follow-up at week 12. SVR12 was achieved by 210 (96%) of 218 patients (95% CI 92·9-98·4). One patient did not achieve SVR12 because of a non-virological reason, and seven patients without cirrhosis relapsed (two subsequently confirmed as reinfections). All 35 patients with cirrhosis achieved SVR12. The most common adverse events were fatigue (29; 13%), headache (27; 12%), and nausea (20; 9%). No patient discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Two patients receiving ART had transient HIV viraemia.This HCV treatment regimen seems to be effective and well tolerated for patients co-infected with HIV with or without cirrhosis. These data are consistent with previous trials of this regimen in the monoinfected population. This regimen continues to be studied in phase 3 trials.Merck SharpDohme Corp.

BACKGROUND: New hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapies with pan-genotypic efficacy are needed. The goals of part A of C-CREST-1 and C-CREST-2 were to compare the efficacies of two doses (300 mg or 450 mg once daily) of uprifosbuvir (MK-3682; NS5B inhibitor) in an 8-week regimen combined with grazoprevir (NS3/4A inhibitor; 100 mg once daily) and an NS5A inhibitor, either elbasvir (50 mg once daily) or ruzasvir (MK-8408; 60 mg once daily), and to evaluate the safety and tolerability of these combination regimens in individuals infected with genotypes 1, 2, or 3.METHODS: Part A of these phase 2, randomised, multicentre, open-label, clinical trials enrolled participants from 11 countries, aged 18 years or older, chronically infected with HCV genotypes 1, 2, or 3, with HCV RNA of at least 10 000 IU/mL, without evidence of cirrhosis, who had not received previous treatment for HCV infection. Within each HCV genotype, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) with a block size of 4, to open-label treatment to one of four treatment groups: grazoprevir (100 mg/day) plus ruzasvir (60 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (300 mg/day); grazoprevir (100 mg/day) plus ruzasvir (60 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (450 mg/day); grazoprevir (100 mg/day) plus elbasvir (50 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (300 mg/day); or grazoprevir (100 mg/day) plus elbasvir (50 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (450 mg/day), according to a computer-generated allocation schedule. Randomisation was centrally implemented using an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving sustained virological response at 12 weeks (SVR12; HCV RNA less than the lower limit of quantitation at 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy) in the per-protocol analysis set, which included all participants who were randomised and received at least one dose of study drug. The trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02332707 and NCT02332720.FINDINGS: 241 participants were randomised between Feb 18, 2015, and March 16, 2015. 240 participants completed 8 weeks of treatment and reached follow-up 12 weeks after the end of treatment. Of the four regimens, grazoprevir plus ruzasvir plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg had the most consistently high SVR12 (>90%) for participants infected with genotype 1 (21 [91%] of 23), genotype 2 (15 [94%] of 16), and genotype 3 (20 [91%] of 22). In particular, among those with genotype 2 infection, the grazoprevir plus ruzasvir plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg regimen had a higher SVR12 (15 [94%] of 16) than the grazoprevir plus ruzasvir plus uprifosbuvir 300 mg regimen (ten [71%] of 14), grazoprevir plus elbasvir plus uprifosbuvir 300 mg regimen (11 [69%] of 16), or grazoprevir plus elbasvir plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg regimen (nine [60%] of 15). Overall, the most common adverse events were headache (55 [23%] of 240), fatigue (47 [20%] of 240), and nausea (32 [13%] of 240). Two (INTERPRETATION: These results support further evaluation of the three-drug direct-acting antiviral agent regimen of grazoprevir 100 mg plus ruzasvir 60 mg plus uprifosbuvir 450 mg among a more diverse HCV-infected population, including those with compensated cirrhosis, previous treatment with an interferon-containing regimen, and HCV-HIV co-infection.FUNDING: Merck & Co, Inc.

Background There is a need for hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapies with excellent efficacy across genotypes and in diverse populations. Part A of the C-CREST-1 and C-CREST-2 trials led to the selection of a three-drug regimen of grazoprevir (MK-5172; an HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor; 100 mg/day) plus ruzasvir (MK-8408; an NS5A inhibitor; 60 mg/day) plus uprifosbuvir (MK-3682; an HCV NS5B polymerase inhibitor; 450 mg/day). Part B of the studies tested this combination as a single formulation in different treatment durations in a broader population. Methods Part B of these randomised, phase 2, open-label clinical trials enrolled individuals from 15 countries who were chronically infected with HCV genotypes 1–6 (HCV RNA ≥10 000 IU/mL) with or without compensated cirrhosis. Those with genotype 1, genotype 2, genotype 4, or genotype 6 were treatment-naive; those with genotype 3 could be treatment-naive or treatment-experienced with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. Randomisation occurred centrally using an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system. Participants were randomly assigned to receive treatment for 8, 12, or 16 weeks with a fixed-dose combination of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir with or without ribavirin. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy (SVR12), defined as HCV RNA less than the lower limit of quantification (either target detected unquantifiable or target not detected [

Many direct-acting antiviral regimens have reduced activity in people with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype (GT) 3 infection and cirrhosis. The C-ISLE study assessed the efficacy and safety of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) plus sofosbuvir (SOF) with and without ribavirin (RBV) in compensated cirrhotic participants with GT3 infection. This was a phase 2, randomized, open-label study. Treatment-naive participants received EBR/GZR + SOF + RBV for 8 weeks or EBR/GZR + SOF for 12 weeks, and peginterferon/RBV treatment-experienced participants received EBR/GZR + SOF ± RBV for 12 weeks or EBR/GZR + SOF for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was HCV RNA

Objectives A two-part (Phase 1B/3), sequential, open-label, multicentre study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of intravenous (iv) posaconazole given as antifungal prophylaxis to neutropenic patients with AML or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or to recipients at risk of invasive fungal disease (IFD) after allogeneic HSCT. Methods Patients ( N = 237) received 300 mg of posaconazole iv twice daily on day 1, followed by 300 mg of posaconazole iv once daily for 4-28 days. After at least 5 days, patients were randomly assigned to receive posaconazole oral suspension, 400 mg twice daily or 200 mg three times daily, to complete a 28 day treatment course. Primary PK parameters were steady-state average concentration over the dosing interval ( C avg ) and posaconazole trough levels ( C min ). Results Mean posaconazole C min was 1320 ng/mL (day 6) and 1297 ng/mL (day 8); steady-state C min was 1090 ng/mL (day 10). Mean steady-state posaconazole C avg was 1500 ng/mL (day 10 or 14) and was similar in HSCT recipients (1560 ng/mL) and AML/MDS patients (1470 ng/mL). The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (8%), nausea (5%) and rash (5%). IFD was reported in 3/237 patients (1%; 2 proven, 1 probable). Conclusions Intravenous posaconazole at 300 mg was well tolerated, resulted in adequate steady-state systemic exposure and was associated with a low incidence of IFD in this population at high risk. Trial registry and number ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01075984.

People with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who have failed treatment with an all-oral regimen represent a challenging treatment population. The present studies evaluated the safety and efficacy of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir, with or without ribavirin, in participants who had failed an NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen. C-SURGE (PN-3682-021) and C-CREST Part C (PN-3682-011 and -012) were open-label, multicenter studies. Participants who had previously relapsed following an NS5A inhibitor-containing all-oral regimen were retreated with grazoprevir 100 mg, ruzasvir 60 mg, and uprifosbuvir 450 mg alone for 24 weeks or with ribavirin for 16 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virologic response (HCV RNA below the limit of quantitation [15 IU/mL]) 12 weeks after treatment completion (SVR12). In C-SURGE, SVR12 was achieved by 49/49 (100%) and 43/44 (98%) genotype (GT)1 participants in the 24-week no ribavirin arm and the 16-week plus ribavirin arm (lost to follow-up, n = 1), respectively. In C-CREST Part C, SVR12 was achieved by 23/24 (96%) participants treated for 16 weeks with ribavirin (GT1, 2/2 [100%]; GT2, 13/14 [93%]; GT3, 8/8 [100%]). One participant with GT2 infection discontinued study medication after a single dose of grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir plus ribavirin due to serious adverse events of vomiting and tachycardia. The presence of baseline resistance-associated substitutions had no impact on SVR12. No participant who completed treatment in either study experienced virologic failure.Grazoprevir, ruzasvir, and uprifosbuvir, with or without ribavirin, for 16 or 24 weeks was safe and highly effective in participants with HCV infection who had previously failed NS5A inhibitor-containing therapy. (Hepatology 2017;66:1794-1804).

People with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection other than genotype 1 represent a heterogeneous group. The aim of the phase 2 C-SCAPE study was to evaluate elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR), with or without ribavirin (RBV), in participants with HCV genotype 2, 4, 5 or 6 infection. This was a part randomised, open-label, parallel-group study (NCT01932762; PN047-03) of treatment-naive, noncirrhotic participants. Participants with HCV genotype 2 infection received GZR 100 mg + RBV ± EBR 50 mg for 12 weeks and those with genotype 4, 5 or 6 infection were randomized to receive EBR/GZR ± RBV for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks after completion of treatment (SVR12; HCV RNA

Summary Background In the C-SURFER study, therapy with the all-oral elbasvir plus grazoprevir regimen for 12 weeks in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and stage 4–5 chronic kidney disease resulted in a high rate of virological cure compared with placebo. Here, we report sustained virological response (SVR), safety data, health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL), and virological resistance analyses in patients in C-SURFER who received immediate antiviral therapy or who received placebo before therapy. Methods In this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study, we randomly assigned adults with HCV genotype 1 infection and stage 4–5 chronic kidney disease enrolled at 68 centres worldwide to either elbasvir 50 mg plus grazoprevir 100 mg once per day for 12 weeks (immediate treatment group) or placebo for 12 weeks followed by elbasvir 50 mg plus grazoprevir 100 mg once per day for 12 weeks beginning at week 16 (deferred treatment group). The primary safety and efficacy endpoints for the immediate treatment group and placebo phase of the deferred treatment group have been reported previously. Here, we report safety and efficacy data for the treatment phase of the deferred treatment group, as well as HRQOL assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey for all groups, and baseline and treatment-emergent resistance-associated substitutions (RASs). SVR at 12 weeks (SVR12) was assessed in the modified full analysis set (FAS), defined as all patients excluding those who did not receive at least one dose of study drug, who died, or who discontinued the study before the end of treatment for reasons determined to be unrelated to HCV treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT02092350. Findings Between March 30 and Nov 28, 2014, 235 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study drug. The modified FAS included 116 patients assigned to immediate treatment and 99 assigned to deferred treatment. 115 (99·1%; 95% CI 95·3–100·0) of 116 assigned to immediate treatment achieved SVR12 compared with 97 (98·0%; 92·9–99·7) of 99 assigned to deferred treatment. In patients with genotype 1a infections, SVR12 was achieved by 11 (84·6%) of 13 patients with detectable baseline NS5A RASs and in 98 (100%) of 98 without. HRQOL did not differ at week 12 between immediate treatment and the placebo phase of deferred treatment. Safety was generally similar between patients receiving immediate treatment and those receiving placebo in the deferred treatment group. One serious adverse event during deferred treatment (interstitial nephritis) and one during the placebo phase of deferred treatment (raised lipase concentration) were deemed related to study drug. Four patients died, one who received immediate treatment (cardiac arrest) and three who received deferred treatment (aortic aneurysm, pneumonia, and unknown cause); all four deaths were considered unrelated to study drugs. Of the three deaths in the deferred treatment group, one occurred during placebo treatment and two occurred before starting active treatment. There were no notable differences in aminotransferase elevations in the deferred treatment group compared with the immediate treatment group, and no patients in the deferred treatment group had total bilirubin elevations. Interpretation These data add to the growing body of clinical evidence for the fixed-dose combination regimen of elbasvir plus grazoprevir for 12 weeks and support use of this therapy in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and stage 4–5 chronic kidney disease. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Background & Aims Persons with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are at risk of progressive liver disease, cirrhosis, and decompensation. We analyzed the effects of the direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir and grazoprevir in patients with HCV infection and compensated cirrhosis, combining data from 6 clinical trials. Methods We performed an integrated analysis of 402 patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection and Child-Pugh A compensated cirrhosis enrolled in 6 clinical trials. All patients received elbasvir/grazoprevir 50 mg/100 mg once daily, with or without ribavirin, for 12−18 weeks. The primary end point was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after completion of therapy (SVR12), defined as a level of HCV RNA Results Among treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, 97.8% (135 of 138) and 88.9% (48 of 54) achieved SVR12, respectively. Among patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, addition of ribavirin did not increase the proportion of treatment-naive patients (90.3%, 28 of 31) or treatment-experienced patients who achieved an SVR12 (91.4%, 74 of 81). All (49 of 49) treatment-experienced patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir with ribavirin for 16 or 18 weeks, and 93.9% (46 of 49) of patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir without ribavirin for 16 or 18 weeks achieved SVR12. Virologic failure was higher among patients with HCV genotype 1a infections compared with patients with genotype 1b or 4 infections, particularly in patients who had not responded to previous interferon therapy. Baseline tests for resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) led to an individualized approach for selecting treatment duration and established a need for ribavirin for patients with HCV genotype 1a infection and RASs, regardless of treatment history. Among patients with HCV genotype 1a infection with and without baseline RASs in HCV nonstructural protein 5A who received elbasvir/grazoprevir for 12 weeks, 73% (8 of 11) and 98% (96 of 98) achieved SVR12, respectively. Both patients with HCV genotype 1a infection with baseline RASs who received 16 or 18 weeks of elbasvir/grazoprevir and ribavirin achieved SVR12. Grade 3 or 4 increases in levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase, which did not cause symptoms, were reported in 2.3% (6 of 264) of patients receiving elbasvir/grazoprevir. Serious adverse events were reported in 3% (8 of 264) patients and no patient had a decompensation-related event. Conclusions In an analysis of data from 6 clinical trials, rates of SVR12 ranged from 89% to 100% in patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infections and compensated cirrhosis treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir, with or without ribavirin. Addition of ribavirin to a 12-week regimen of elbasvir/grazoprevir had little effect on the proportion of treatment-naive or treatment-experienced patients who achieved an SVR12. However, virologic failure did not occur in any treatment-experienced patients when the duration of elbasvir/grazoprevir and ribavirin therapy was extended to 16 or 18 weeks. Baseline analysis of RASs (or in the absence of this test, a history of nonresponse to interferon) can be used to determine treatment duration and the need for ribavirin in patients with HCV genotype 1a infection. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02092350, NCT02105662, NCT02105467, NCT02105701, NCT01717326, and NCT02105454.

Summary Elbasvir (EBR; HCV NS5A inhibitor) and grazoprevir (GZR; HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor) are approved as a fixed-dose combination to treat patients chronically infected with HCV genotypes 1 and 4. During the development program and supported by in vitro potency, the efficacy of EBR + GZR was assessed in HCV GT3-infected patients. This study's aim was to determine the efficacy and tolerability of 12 or 18 weeks of EBR+GZR with ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naive, non-cirrhotic HCV GT3-infected patients. Randomized patients received open-label EBR (50 mg once daily) + GZR (100 mg once daily) + RBV. The primary efficacy objective was to evaluate the sustained virologic response rates 12 weeks after the end of all study therapy (SVR12). SVR12 rates (95% confidence interval) were 45.0% (23.1, 68.5) and 57.1% (34.0, 78.2) after treatment with EBR+GZR+RBV for 12 weeks or 18 weeks, respectively. On-treatment virologic failure was observed in 41% (17/41) of patients. At virologic failure, resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) with a >5 fold shift in potency occurred in the NS3 region in 6 (35%) patients and in the NS5A region in 16 (94%) patients. The most common RAS at virologic failure was Y93H in NS5A which was identified in 13/17 (76%) patients. The efficacy of EBR+GZR+RBV was suboptimal in HCV GT3-infected patients due to a high rate of on-treatment virologic failure and treatment emergent RASs which demonstrates an inadequate barrier to the development of GT3 resistance. However, rapid viral clearance demonstrated the antiviral activity of EBR+GZR+RBV in GT3-infected patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

This was a phase 1B, dose-ranging, multicenter, pharmacokinetics, and safety study of cyclodextrin-based posaconazole intravenous (i.v.) solution administered through a central line to subjects at high risk for invasive fungal disease (part 1 of a 2-part study [phase 1B/3]). Initially, the safety and tolerability of single-dose posaconazole i.v. 200 mg ( n = 10) were compared with those of a placebo ( n = 11). Subsequently, 2 doses were evaluated, posaconazole i.v. 200 mg once daily (q.d.) ( n = 21) and 300 mg q.d. ( n = 24). The subjects received twice-daily (b.i.d.) posaconazole i.v. on day 1, followed by 13 days of posaconazole i.v. q.d., then 14 days of posaconazole oral suspension 400 mg b.i.d. The steady-state (day 14) exposure target (average concentration [areas under concentration-time curve {AUCs}/24 h, average concentrations at steady state { C avg s}], of ≥500 to ≤2,500 ng/ml in ≥90% of the subjects) was achieved by 94% of the subjects for 200 mg posaconazole q.d. and by 95% of subjects for 300 mg posaconazole q.d. The desired exposure target (mean steady-state C avg , ∼1,200 ng/ml) was 1,180 ng/ml in the 200-mg dosing cohort and was exceeded in the 300-mg dosing cohort (1,430 ng/ml). Posaconazole i.v. was well tolerated. Posaconazole i.v. 300 mg q.d. was selected for the phase 3 study segment. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01075984.)

Summary Background The HVTN 503/Phambili study, which assessed the efficacy of the Merck Ad5 gag/pol/nef subtype B HIV-1 preventive vaccine in South Africa, was stopped when futility criteria in the Step study (assessing the same vaccine in the Americas, Caribbean, and Australia) were met. Here we report long-term follow-up data. Methods HVTN 503/Phambili was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial that recruited HIV-1 uninfected, sexually active adults aged 18–35 years from five sites in South Africa. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer-generated random numbers to either vaccine or placebo, stratified by site and sex. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate HIV-1 infection in the modified intention-to-treat cohort, all of whom were unmasked early in follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00413725 and the South African National Health Research Database, number DOH-27-0207-1539. Findings Between Jan 24, 2007, and Sept 19, 2007, 801 participants (26·7%) of a planned 3000 were randomly assigned (400 to vaccine, 401 to placebo); 216 (27%) received only one injection, 529 (66%) received only two injections, and 56 (7%) received three injections. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 31–42), 63 vaccine recipients (16%) had HIV-1 infection compared with 37 placebo recipients (9%; adjusted HR 1·70, 95% CI 1·13–2·55; p=0·01). Risk for HIV-1 infection did not differ according to the number of vaccinations received, sex, circumcision, or adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) serostatus. Differences in risk behaviour at baseline or during the study, or annualised dropout rate (7·7% [95% CI 6·2–9·5] for vaccine recipients vs 8·8% [7·1–10·7] for placebo recipients; p=0·40) are unlikely explanations for the increased rate of HIV-1 infections seen in vaccine recipients. Interpretation The increased risk of HIV-1 acquisition in vaccine recipients, irrespective of number of doses received, warrants further investigation to understand the biological mechanism. We caution against further use of the Ad5 vector for HIV vaccines. Funding National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Merck, and South African Medical Research Council.

Direct-acting antiviral agents have not been studied exclusively in patients with inherited blood disorders and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The objective of the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III C-EDGE IBLD study was to assess the safety and efficacy of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) in patients with inherited bleeding disorders and HCV infection. One hundred fifty-nine adults with HCV infection and sickle cell anemia, thalassemia, or hemophilia A/B or von Willebrand disease were enrolled at 31 study sites in the United States, Europe, Australia, Canada, Israel, and Thailand. Patients were given an oral, once-daily, fixed-dose combination of EBR/GZR 50 mg/100 mg for 12 weeks and randomized to the immediate-treatment group (ITG) or deferred-treatment group (DTG; placebo followed by active treatment). The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients in the ITG with unquantifiable HCV RNA 12 weeks posttreatment (sustained virological response 12 weeks after completion of study treatment; SVR12) and the comparison of safety in the ITG and DTG. In the ITG, 100 of 107 patients (93.5%) achieved SVR12, 6 relapsed, and 1 was lost to follow-up. SVR12 was achieved in 94.7% (18 of 19), 97.6% (40 of 41), and 89.4% (42 of 47) of patients with sickle cell disease, β-thalassemia, and hemophilia A/B or von Willebrand disease, respectively. Serious adverse events were reported by 2.8% (n = 3) and 11.5% (n = 6) of patients in the ITG and DTG, respectively. Hemoglobin levels and international normalized ratio values were similar in patients receiving EBR/GZR and placebo; among patients with hemoglobinopathies, change in mean hemoglobin levels was similar in those receiving EBR/GZR compared to those receiving placebo. Conclusion: These results add to the expanding pool of data available for EBR/GZR, indicating a high level of efficacy and favorable tolerability in patients with HCV infection. (Hepatology 2017;66:736–745)

Background Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in persons who inject drugs (PWID). Objective To evaluate elbasvir-grazoprevir in treating HCV infection in PWID. Design Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105688). Setting Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Patients 301 treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection who were at least 80% adherent to visits for opioid agonist therapy (OAT). Intervention The immediate-treatment group (ITG) received elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks; the deferred-treatment group (DTG) received placebo for 12 weeks, no treatment for 4 weeks, then open-label elbasvir-grazoprevir for 12 weeks. Measurements The primary outcome was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12), evaluated separately in the ITG and DTG. Other outcomes included SVR24, viral recurrence or reinfection, and adverse events. Results The SVR12 was 91.5% (95% CI, 86.8% to 95.0%) in the ITG and 89.5% (95% CI, 81.5% to 94.8%) in the active phase of the DTG. Drug use at baseline and during treatment did not affect SVR12 or adherence to HCV therapy. Among 18 patients with posttreatment viral recurrence through 24-week follow-up, 6 had probable reinfection. If the probable reinfections were assumed to be responses, SVR12 was 94.0% (CI, 89.8% to 96.9%) in the ITG. One patient in the ITG (1 of 201) and 1 in the placebo-phase DTG (1 of 100) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. Limitation These findings may not be generalizable to PWID who are not receiving OAT, nor do they apply to persons with genotype 3 infection, a common strain in PWID. Conclusion Patients with HCV infection who were receiving OAT and treated with elbasvir-grazoprevir had high rates of SVR12, regardless of ongoing drug use. These results support the removal of drug use as a barrier to interferon-free HCV treatment for patients receiving OAT. Primary funding source Merck & Co.

Direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) represent the standard of care for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Combining DAAs with different mechanisms may allow for shorter treatment durations that are effective across multiple genotypes. The aim of the C-SWIFT study was to identify the minimum effective treatment duration across multiple genotypes. C-SWIFT was an open-label, single-center trial in treatment-naive patients with chronic HCV genotype (GT)1 or 3 infection. All patients received elbasvir (EBR) 50 mg/grazoprevir (GZR) 100 mg with sofosbuvir (SOF) 400 mg for 4-12 weeks. Patients with GT1 infection who failed therapy were eligible for retreatment with EBR/GZR+SOF and ribavirin for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virological response [SVR]12 (SVR of HCV RNA

Patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1, 4, or 6, with or without cirrhosis, previously treated with peg-interferon and ribavirin, are a challenge to treat. We performed a phase 3 randomized controlled open-label trial to assess the effects of 12 or 16 weeks of treatment with once-daily elbasvir (an HCV NS5A inhibitor, 50 mg) and grazoprevir (an HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor, 100 mg), in a fixed-dose combination tablet, with or without twice-daily ribavirin, in this patient population.We analyzed data from 420 patients (35% with cirrhosis, 64% with a null or partial response to peg-interferon and ribavirin) who were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to groups given elbasvir and grazoprevir once daily, with or without twice-daily ribavirin, for 12 or 16 weeks, at 65 study centers in 15 countries in Europe, Asia, and Central and North America. Randomization was stratified by cirrhosis status and type of peg-interferon and ribavirin treatment failure. HCV RNA was measured using COBAS TaqMan v2.0. The primary end point was HCV RNA15 IU/mL, 12 weeks after completion of treatment (SVR12). We aimed to determine whether the proportion of patients achieving an SVR12 in any group was greater than the reference rate (58%).With 12 weeks of treatment, an SVR12 was achieved by 92.4% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir and 94.2% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir with ribavirin. With 16 weeks of treatment, an SVR12 was achieved by 92.4% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir and 98.1% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir with ribavirin. Among patients treated for 12 weeks without ribavirin, virologic failure occurred in 6.8%, 0%, and 12.5% of patients with HCV genotype 1a, 1b, or 4 infection, respectively. Among patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir for 12 weeks, virologic failure occurred in 0% of patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 and 4 who relapsed after completing peg-interferon and ribavirin, and 7.5% infected with HCV genotypes 1 and 4, respectively, with a null or partial response to peg-interferon and ribavirin. Among patients treated for 16 weeks who received ribavirin, there were no incidences of virologic failure. Common adverse events were fatigue (23.1%), headache (19.8%), and nausea (11.0%).The combination tablet of elbasvir and grazoprevir, with or without ribavirin, was highly efficacious in inducing an SVR12 in patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection failed by previous treatment with peg-interferon and ribavirin, including patients with cirrhosis and/or a prior null response. The treatment was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT02105701.