New treatments for genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C - focus on simeprevir.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kanda T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4043814 | biostudies-literature | 2014
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
New treatments for genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C - focus on simeprevir.
Kanda Tatsuo T Nakamoto Shingo S Wu Shuang S Yokosuka Osamu O
Therapeutics and clinical risk management 20140524
Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection causes end-stage liver diseases and hepato cellular carcinoma. In the USA, Canada, and Japan, simeprevir - one of the second-generation HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitors - in combination with peginterferon α-2a or 2b plus ribavirin has recently been approved for HCV genotype 1-infected patients and is now used in daily clinical practice. This review summarizes the mechanism of action of simeprevir and the results of clinical trials of simeprevir and peginte ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Simeprevir is a novel NS3/4A protease inhibitor (PI) of hepatitis C virus (HCV). The baseline polymorphism NS3-Q80K is frequently observed in genotype (GT) 1a HCV and often associated with treatment failure in simeprevir-containing regimens. We aimed to elucidate mechanisms of treatment failure due to NS3-Q80K. We included a Q80R mutation in our study and generated a series of Huh-7.5 cell lines, each of which harbored either wild-type GT 1a strain H77S.3 or the Q80K or Q80R variant. The cells were cultured with increasing concentrations of simeprevir, and NS3 domain sequences were determined. The mutations identified by sequence analyses were subsequently introduced into H77S.3. The sensitivity of each mutant to the NS3/4A PIs simeprevir, asunaprevir, grazoprevir, and paritaprevir was analyzed. We introduced the mutations into GT 1b strain N.2 and compared the sensitivity to simeprevir with that of GT 1a strain H77S.3. While simeprevir treatment selected mutations at residue D168, such as D168A/V in the wild-type virus, an additional mutation at residue R155, R155K, was selected in Q80K/R variants at simeprevir concentrations of <2.5 ?M. Sensitivity analyses showed that simeprevir concentrations of <1 ?M significantly boosted the replication of Q80K/R R155K variants. Interestingly, this boost was not observed with the other NS3/4A PIs or in Q80R R155Q/G/T/W variants or GT 1b isolates. The boosted replication of the Q80K+R155K variant by simeprevir could be related to treatment failure in simeprevir-containing antiviral treatments in GT 1a HCV-infected patients with the NS3-Q80K polymorphism. This result provides new insight into how resistance-associated variants can cause treatment failure.
| S-EPMC6021633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledHepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients with cirrhosis are historically a difficult-to-treat population and are at risk of hepatic decompensation. In the phase 2 COSMOS study that evaluated simeprevir (HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor) + sofosbuvir (HCV nucleotide analogue NS5B polymerase inhibitor) ± ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks in HCV genotype (GT)1-infected patients, high rates of sustained virologic response 12 weeks after planned end of treatment (SVR12) were achieved, including in patients with cirrhosis (METAVIR score F4). This phase 3, open-label, single-arm study (OPTIMIST-2 [NCT02114151]) evaluated the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks of simeprevir + sofosbuvir in HCV GT1-infected treatment-naive or treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis. Patients (aged 18-70 years) with chronic HCV GT1 infection and documented presence of cirrhosis received oral simeprevir 150 mg once daily + sofosbuvir 400 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients achieving SVR12 versus a composite historical control (SVR12 rate of 70%). Safety and patient-reported outcomes were assessed. Overall, 103 patients received treatment. SVR12 with simeprevir + sofosbuvir (83%, 95% confidence interval 76%-91%) met the primary objective of superiority versus the historical control (70%). SVR12 rates for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients were 88% (44/50) and 79% (42/53), respectively. Adverse events occurred in 72 (70%) patients, with most (64%) being grade 1 or 2. Serious adverse events (none considered related to study treatment) occurred in five (5%) patients, and three (3%) patients discontinued all study treatment due to adverse events. Patient-reported outcomes improved from baseline to follow-up week 12.ConclusionSimeprevir + sofosbuvir for 12 weeks achieved superiority in SVR12 rates versus the historical control in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced HCV GT1-infected patients with cirrhosis and was generally safe and well tolerated. (Hepatology 2016;64:360-369).
| S-EPMC5297873 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This Phase 3, open-label, rollover study (NCT01323244) investigated the efficacy and safety of simeprevir plus peginterferon ?-2a (PegIFN?-2a) and ribavirin (RBV) in a well-characterized population of HCV genotype 1 (GT1)-infected treatment-experienced patients. METHODS:Patients who had failed PegIFN?/RBV treatment in the placebo arm of a previous Phase 2/3 simeprevir study (Phase 2/3 group, n = 125), or had been exposed to HCV direct-acting antivirals (simeprevir or other) for up to 14 days in a selected Phase 1 study (Phase 1 group, n = 16), were eligible. Phase 2/3 group patients were classified according to prior relapse, breakthrough, or non-response (null response, partial response, non-classifiable non-response) to PegIFN?/RBV. Eight patients in the Phase 1 group received short-term (?14 days) simeprevir. Treatment comprised simeprevir 150 mg once daily (QD) plus PegIFN?-2a/RBV for 12 weeks followed by PegIFN?-2a/RBV for 12 or 36 weeks (using response-guided therapy [RGT] to determine total treatment duration in Phase 2/3 prior relapsers or breakthrough) or 36 weeks fixed (Phase 2/3 group non-responders and Phase 1 group). The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks after planned end of treatment (SVR12). RESULTS:Phase 2/3 group: SVR12 rate was 69.6% (87/125) overall; 92.7% (51/55), 60.0% (6/10), 64.3% (18/28), and 36.7% (11/30) in patients with prior relapse, viral breakthrough, partial response, or null response, respectively. SVR12 rates were similar for patients with HCV GT1a (66.0% [33/50]) and GT1b infection (72.0% [54/75]) and among HCV GT1a-infected patients with/without a baseline Q80K polymorphism (66.7% [8/12] and 65.8% [25/38], respectively). The majority of RGT-eligible patients (prior viral relapse or breakthrough) met RGT criteria (89.2% [58/65]); of these, 89.7% (52/58) achieved SVR12. Overall, 16.0% (20/125) of patients experienced on-treatment failure and 14.4% (18/125) experienced post-treatment failure (15 relapses, 3 missing data). Phase 1 group (simeprevir-naïve and -experienced patients combined): SVR12 rate was 37.5% (6/16). Safety and tolerability findings were comparable to those of the feeder studies. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of RGT-eligible patients met criteria for shortening treatment to 24 weeks in total. Simeprevir 150 mg QD with PegIFN?-2a/RBV led to a high SVR rate among prior relapsers with HCV GT1 infection. No new safety signals were noted. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT01323244 . (date of registration: March 24, 2011).
| S-EPMC5457573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interactions between simeprevir (hepatitis C virus [HCV] NS3/4A protease inhibitor) and ledipasvir (HCV NS5A replication complex inhibitor) were investigated in treatment-naive HCV genotype 1-infected patients without cirrhosis, treated with simeprevir-sofosbuvir-ledipasvir in a two-panel, phase 2, open-label study. Patients had stable background treatment with sofosbuvir (400 mg once daily [QD]). In panel 1 (n = 20), the effect of ledipasvir (90 mg QD) on simeprevir (150 mg QD) was studied. Patients received simeprevir and sofosbuvir from days 1 to 14; steady-state pharmacokinetics (PK) of simeprevir was assessed (day 14). On day 15, ledipasvir was added and steady-state PK of simeprevir in the combination was evaluated (day 28). In panel 2 (n = 20), the effect of simeprevir on ledipasvir was investigated. From days 1 to 14, patients received ledipasvir and sofosbuvir and steady-state PK of ledipasvir was assessed (day 14). On day 15, simeprevir was added and a full PK profile was obtained (day 28). The least-squares mean maximum plasma concentration and area under the concentration-time curve (90% confidence interval) increased 2.3-fold (2.0- to 2.8-fold) and 3.1-fold (2.4- to 3.8-fold) for simeprevir, respectively (panel 1), and 1.6-fold (1.4- to 1.9-fold) and 1.7-fold (1.6- to 2.0-fold) for ledipasvir, respectively (panel 2), in the presence versus the absence of the other drug. All patients achieved sustained virologic responses 12 weeks after treatment end. Adverse events, mainly grade 1/2, occurred in 80% of patients; the most common was photosensitivity (45%). Due to the magnitude of interaction and the limited amount of safety data available, the use of this treatment combination is not recommended. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02421211.).
| S-EPMC5700296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo determine the number of mutations in the NS5A region of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) and its relationship to the response to antiviral therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 who are non-responders to two or more treatments.MethodsSequences within HCV NS5A [PKR binding domain (PKRBD) and the interferon-sensitivity-determining region (ISDR)] were analysed via direct sequencing in a selected cohort of 72 patients, with a total of 201 treatments [interferon-alpha (IFN-α), n = 49; IFN-α + ribavirin (RBV), n = 75; pegylated (peg) IFN-α + RBV, n = 47; first-generation direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), n = 13; and second-generation DAAs, n = 17]. Of these, 48/201 achieved a sustained virological response (SVR) and 153/201 achieved no virological response (NVR).ResultsFor both regions, treatments resulting in SVR were associated with more baseline mutations than were treatments resulting in NVR (SVR vs NVR; PKRBD: 5.82 ± 3 vs 4.86 ± 2 mutations, P = 0.045; ISDR: 2.65 ± 2 vs 1.51 ± 1.7 mutations, P = 0.005). A decrease or no change in the number of mutations over time between treatments in the PKRBD or ISDR, as shown by sequencing, was associated with patients who usually failed to respond to treatment (PKRBD, P = 0.02; ISDR, P = 0.001). Moreover, patients showing a post-treatment baseline viral load > 600000 IU/mL and increased ISDR mutations with respect to the previous treatment were 9.21 times more likely to achieve SVR (P = 0.001).ConclusionThe obtained results show that among patients who have shown no response to two or more antiviral treatments, the likelihood of achieving SVR increases with the genetic variability in the ISDR region (≥ 2 mutations or number of substitutions from the HCV-J and HCV-1 prototype), especially when the viral load is greater than 600000 IU/mL.
| S-EPMC5504369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIM:To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of telaprevir (TVR)-and simeprevir (SMV)-based triple therapies in elderly patients, specifically patients aged 66 years or older. METHODS:The present study enrolled 112 and 76 Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1b infection who were treated with a 12-wk TVR-based or SMV-based triple therapy, respectively, followed by a dual therapy that included pegylated interferon ? and ribavirin (RBV) for 12 wk. The patients were categorized into two groups according to age as follows: A younger group of patients aged ? 65 years old and an older group of patients aged > 65 years old. Among the patients treated with TVR-based triple therapy, 34 patients were included in the older group. The median ages were 56 years (range: 28-65 years) in the younger group and 69 years (range: 66-81 years) in the older group. Among the patients treated with SMV-based triple therapy, 39 patients were included in the older group. The median ages were 59 years (range: 36-65 years) in the younger group and 71 years (range: 66-86 years) in the older group. The clinical, biochemical and virological data were analyzed before and during treatment. RESULTS:Among the patients treated with the TVR-based triple therapy, no significant difference in the sustained virological response (SVR) was found between the younger (80.8%) and older (88.2%) groups. The SVR rates for patients with the interleukin 28B (IL28B) (rs8099917) TG/GG-genotypes (73.9% and 60.0% in the younger and older groups, respectively) were significantly lower than for patients with the IL28B TT-genotype (86.3% and 92.9%, respectively). The cumulative exposure to RBV for the entire 24-wk treatment period (as a percentage of the target dose) was significantly higher in the younger group than in the older group (91.7% vs 66.7%, respectively, P < 0.01), but the cumulative exposure to TVR was not significantly different between the younger and older groups (91.6% vs 81.9%, respectively). A multivariate analysis identified the TT-genotype of IL28B (OR = 8.160; 95%CI: 1.593-41.804, P = 0.012) and the adherence of RBV (> 60%) (OR = 11.052; 95%CI: 1.160-105.273, P = 0.037) as independent factors associated with the SVR. Adverse events resulted in discontinuation of the treatment in 11.3% and 14.7% of the younger and older groups, respectively. Among the patients treated with the SMV-based triple therapy, no significant difference in the SVR rare was found between the younger (81.1%) and older (82.1%) groups. The SVR rates for patients with the IL28B TG/GG-genotypes (77.8% and 64.7% in the younger and older groups, respectively) were significantly lower than for patients with the IL28B TT-genotype (88.2% and 100%, respectively). A multivariate analysis identified the TT-genotype of IL28B as an independent factor associated with the SVR (OR = 9.677; 95%CI: 1.114-84.087, P = 0.040). Adverse events resulted in discontinuation of the treatment in 7.0% and 14.3% of patients in the younger and older groups, respectively. CONCLUSION:Both TVR- and SMV-based triple therapies can be successfully used to treat patients aged 66 years or older with genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C. Genotyping of the IL28B indicates a potential to achieve SVR in these difficult-to-treat elderly patients.
| S-EPMC5316845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Simeprevir ObservatioNal Effectiveness across practice seTtings (SONET) study evaluated the real-world effectiveness of simeprevir-based treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.MethodsThe SONET study was a phase 4, prospective, observational, United States-based study enrolling patients ≥18 years of age with chronic genotype 1 HCV infection. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12), defined as HCV ribonucleic acid undetectable ≥12 weeks after the end of all HCV treatments.ResultsOf 315 patients (intent-to-treat [ITT] population), 275 (87.3%) completed the study. Overall, 291 were treated with simeprevir + sofosbuvir, 17 with simeprevir + sofosbuvir + ribavirin, and 7 with simeprevir + peginterferon + ribavirin. The majority of patients were male (63.2%) and white (60.6%); median age was 58 years, 71.7% had genotype/subtype 1a, and 39.4% had cirrhosis. The SVR12 was achieved by 81.2% (255 of 314) of ITT patients (analysis excluded 1 patient who completed the study but was missing SVR12 data); 2 had viral breakthrough and 18 had viral relapse. The SVR12 was achieved by 92.4% (255 of 276) of patients in the modified ITT (mITT) population, which excluded patients who discontinued treatment for nonvirologic reasons before the SVR12 time point or were missing SVR12 assessment data. Among mITT patients, higher SVR12 rates were associated with factors including age ≥65 years, non-Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and employment status, but not genotype/subtype nor presence of cirrhosis. Simeprevir-based treatment was well tolerated; no serious adverse events were considered related to simeprevir.ConclusionsIn the real-world setting, simeprevir + sofosbuvir treatment was common and 92% of mITT patients achieved SVR12. Simeprevir-based treatment was effective and well tolerated in this cohort, including patients with cirrhosis.
| S-EPMC5413999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledThe phase IIb, double-blind, placebo-controlled PILLAR trial investigated the efficacy and safety of two different simeprevir (SMV) doses administered once-daily (QD) with pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN)-α-2a and ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. Patients were randomized to one of five treatments: SMV (75 or 150 mg QD) for 12 or 24 weeks or placebo, plus Peg-IFN and RBV. Patients in the SMV arms stopped all treatment at week 24 if response-guided therapy (RGT) criteria were met; patients not meeting RGT continued with Peg-IFN and RBV until week 48, as did patients in the placebo control group. Sustained virologic response (SVR) rates measured 24 weeks after the planned end of treatment (SVR24) were 74.7%-86.1% in the SMV groups versus 64.9% in the control group (P < 0.05 for all comparisons [SMV versus placebo], except SMV 75 mg for 24 weeks). Rapid virologic response (HCV RNA <25 IU/mL undetectable at week 4) was achieved by 68.0%-75.6% of SMV-treated and 5.2% of placebo control patients. According to RGT criteria, 79.2%-86.1% of SMV-treated patients completed treatment by week 24; 85.2%-95.6% of these subsequently achieved SVR24. The adverse event profile was generally similar across the SMV and placebo control groups, with the exception of mild reversible hyperbilirubinemia, without serum aminotransferase abnormalities, associated with higher doses of SMV.ConclusionSMV QD in combination with Peg-IFN and RBV significantly improves SVR rates, compared with Peg-IFN and RBV alone, and allows the majority of patients to shorten their therapy duration to 24 weeks.
| S-EPMC4112500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition among men of a wide age range, with detrimental effects on quality of life. The etiology, pathogenesis, and optimal treatment of CP/CPPS remain unknown, although progress has been made in these domains in recent years. A wide variety of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies have been studied in clinical trials, but most have shown limited efficacy in symptom alleviation. CP/CPPS is increasingly viewed as a condition that involves variable degrees of neuropathic pain. Medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, memantine, and tricyclic antidepressants are often used in other neuropathic pain conditions and, therefore, are considered potential treatments for CP/CPPS. Few studies of these agents in patients with CP/CPPS have been reported, but future clinical trials should help to determine their utility and to characterize the pathogenetic mechanisms of pain in CP/CPPS. Combining treatment trials with biomarker, genomic, and imaging studies, in addition to epidemiologic and symptom-based assessments, will maximize the ability to probe disease etiology and pathogenesis, as well as identify effective treatment.
| S-EPMC2837110 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSome patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection forego treatment due to concerns about treatment efficacy, treatment duration, and side effects.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to quantify patient preferences among possible outcomes associated with new, direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) for the treatment of HCV infection and determine which treatment features are most important to patients in making treatment decisions.MethodsAdult participants with a self-reported physician diagnosis of HCV infection in five countries completed a web-enabled, choice-format conjoint analysis survey. The survey presented participants with 20 treatment-choice questions. Each treatment-choice question included a pair of hypothetical treatment profiles with varying levels of six attributes: treatment duration; chance of getting rid of the virus completely (i.e. likelihood of a sustained virologic response [SVR]); weeks on an additional, third medicine (i.e. a DAA); risk of a severe rash; risk of severe anemia; and number of times a day the third medicine is taken. Treatment-choice questions were based on a pre-determined experimental design with known statistical properties. Random-parameters logit was used to estimate preference weights for all attribute levels and the mean relative importance of each attribute.Results284 participants completed the survey. Likelihood of an SVR was the most important outcome to participants, followed by severe anemia risk, severe rash risk, therapy type (a combination of total weeks of treatment and weeks on the third medicine), and dosing of the third medicine. Controlling for other factors, preferences were similar across all therapy types examined.ConclusionPatients with HCV infection indicate a willingness to accept an increased risk of side effects for sufficient improvement in the likelihood of treatment response.
| S-EPMC3714139 | biostudies-literature