Clinical trials provided conflicting results about whether extended duration of treatment with pegylated interferon-alfa (pegIFN-alfa) and ribavirin (more than 48 weeks) improves rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 and slow virologic response. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the overall impact of extended treatment, compared with standard treatment, on virologic response rates in these patients.
We performed a literature search to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included monoinfected, treatment-naive patients infected with HCV genotype 1; data were compared between slow responding patients treated with pegIFN-alfa-2a/b plus ribavirin for 48 weeks and those that received extended treatment (as much as 72 weeks). End points included SVR rates, end-of-treatment (EOT) response and relapse rates; they were calculated according to the DerSimonian-Laird estimate.
Six RCTs assessed the benefits of extended treatment with pegIFN-alfa-2a/b and ribavirin in treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 that were slow responders (n = 669). The extended treatment significantly improved SVR rates in slow responders, compared with the standard of care (14.7% increase in overall SVR; 95% confidence interval, 4%-25.5%; P = .0072). Rates of viral relapse were significantly reduced by extended treatment, but EOT response rates were similar. The frequency of voluntary treatment discontinuation, but not of serious adverse events, was significantly increased by extended therapy.
Extending the duration of treatment with pegIFN-alfa-2a/b and ribavirin in patients with HCV genotype 1 and a slow response to therapy improves the rate of SVR.
"Based on these findings, we propose the use of “response-guided therapy”, in which a treatment regimen is modified according to viral kinetics. For the treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C, proposed treatment strategies include shortening of treatment period in patients with RVR and extension of treatment period in patients with a delayed response to the initial treatment as judged at week 12 [9–17]. For the treatment of genotype 1 high virus titer chronic hepatitis C, shortening of the treatment period may not be recommended even if RVR is achieved because of a possible reduction in the SVR rate, whereas extension of the treatment period to 72 weeks has been reported to increase the SVR rate in patients showing a delayed response to the initial treatment [12, 14–18]. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background
We conducted a multicenter randomized clinical trial to determine the optimal treatment strategy against chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) with genotype 1b and a high viral load (G1b/high).
The study subjects included 153 patients with G1b/high. Patients were initially treated with PEG-IFNα-2a alone and then randomly assigned to receive different treatment regimens. Ribavirin (RBV) was administered to all patients with HCV RNA at week 4. Patients negative for HCV RNA at week 4 were randomly assigned to receive PEG-IFNα-2a (group A) or PEG-IFNα-2a/RBV (group B). Patients who showed HCV RNA at week 4 but were negative at week 12 were randomly assigned to receive weekly PEG-IFNα-2a (group C) or biweekly therapy (group D). Patients who showed HCV RNA at week 12 but were negative at week 24 were randomly assigned to receive PEG-IFNα-2a/RBV (group E) or PEG-IFNα-2a/RBV/fluvastatin (group F).
Overall, the rate of sustained virological response (SVR) was 46 % (70/153). The total SVR rate in the group (A, D, and F) of response-guided therapy was significantly higher than that in the group (B, C, and E) of conventional therapy [70 % (38/54) versus 52 % (32/61), p = 0.049]. Although IL28-B polymorphism and Core 70 mutation were significantly associated with efficacy, patients with rapid virological response (RVR) and complete early virological response (cEVR) achieved high SVR rates regardless of their status of IL-28B polymorphism and Core 70 mutation.
In addition to knowing the IL-28B polymorphism and Core 70 mutation status, understanding the likelihood of virological response during treatment is critical in determining the appropriate treatment strategy.
Journal of Gastroenterology 03/2013; 49(3). DOI:10.1007/s00535-013-0785-2 · 4.52 Impact Factor
"Apparently, HCV genotype 1 (and 4) patients with poorresponse IL28B alleles should be considered as difficult to cure patients. Traditional approaches such as prolonged therapy with pegIFN-a and ribavirin are of limited efficacy . In contrast, phase II and III clinical trials have evidenced an enormous potential of telaprevir or boceprevir in combination with pegIFN-a and ribavirin in previous partial non-responders and relapsers to standard therapy  . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified genetic variations near the IL28B gene which are strongly associated with spontaneous and treatment-induced clearance of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Protective IL28B variations are strongly associated with on-treatment viral kinetics and approximately 2-fold increased sustained virologic response (SVR) rates in HCV genotype 1 and 4 patients. In HCV genotype 1 patients, IL28B variations were shown to be the strongest pre-treatment predictor of virologic response. In the treatment of HCV genotype 2 and 3 infected patients, IL28B variations play only a minor role. Preliminary data indicate that IL28B variations are also associated with treatment outcome of regimens, including directly acting antiviral (DAA) agents, though their impact seems to be attenuated compared to standard treatment. Here, we review these important findings and discuss possible implications for clinical decision making in the treatment of HCV infection.
Journal of Hepatology 03/2011; 55(3):692-701. DOI:10.1016/j.jhep.2011.03.006 · 11.34 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.