User login
MAUI, HAWAII – Treatment of acute rather than chronic hepatitis C infection is well worth considering in selected circumstances, Norah Terrault, MD, asserted at the Gastroenterology Updates, IBD, Liver Disease meeting.
This is not at present guideline-recommended therapy. Current American Association for the Study of Liver Disease/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidance states that while there is emerging data to support treatment of acute hepatitis C, the evidence isn’t yet sufficiently robust to support a particular regimen or duration. The guidelines currently recommend waiting 6 months to see if the acute infection resolves spontaneously, as happens in a minority of cases, or becomes chronic, at which point it becomes guideline-directed treatment time. But Dr. Terrault believes persuasive evidence to back treatment of acute hepatitis C infection (HCV) is forthcoming, and she noted that the guidelines leave the door ajar by stating, “There are instances wherein a clinician may decide that the benefits of early treatment outweigh waiting for possible spontaneous clearance.”
Treatment of acute HCV
Dr. Terrault deems treatment of acute HCV warranted in circumstances in which there is significant danger of transmission from the acutely infected individual to others. For example, health care providers with a needlestick HCV infection, injecting drug users, and men with acute HCV/HIV coinfection. She also treats acute HCV in patients with underlying chronic liver disease.
“Clearly, I wouldn’t want those individuals to have any worsening of their liver function, so I would treat them acutely,” explained Dr. Terrault, professor of medicine and director of the Viral Hepatitis Center at the University of California, San Francisco.
She cited as particularly impressive the results of the SWIFT-C trial presented by Suzanna Naggie, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., at the 2017 AASLD annual meeting. In this modest-size, National Institutes of Health–sponsored, multicenter study of HIV-infected men with acute HCV coinfection, the sustained viral response (SVR) rate with 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni) was 100%, regardless of their baseline HCV RNA level.
“I think this is remarkable. They cleared virus quite late and yet they went on to achieve HCV eradication. It highlights how little we really know about the treatment of individuals in this phase and that relying on HCV RNA levels may not tell the whole story. I think this is important data to suggest maybe when we treat acute hepatitis C we can use a shorter duration of treatment for that population. There are also other small studies testing 8 weeks of treatment in non–HIV-infected individuals with acute hepatitis C in which they also showed very high SVR rates,” the hepatologist said.
Copanelist Steven L. Flamm, MD, said that when he encounters a patient with acute HCV he, too, is prepared to offer treatment – he finds the available supporting evidence sufficiently compelling – but he often encounters a problem.
“Sometimes I’m blocked by insurance companies because this isn’t officially approved,” noted Dr. Flamm, professor of medicine and chief of the hepatology program at Northwestern University, Chicago.
“You’re right,” Dr. Terrault commented, “we have to make a pretty compelling argument to the insurer as to why we’re treating. But ‘treat to prevent transmission to others’ usually is successful in our hands.”
HCV in patients with end-stage renal disease
The product labeling for sofosbuvir (Sovaldi) says the drug’s safety and efficacy haven’t been established in patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease. However, a small multicenter study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting demonstrated that 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir achieved a 100% SVR rate in patients with genotype 1 HCV and severe renal impairment, including some on dialysis, with no clinically meaningful change in estimated glomerular filtration rate or any signal of cardiac arrhythmia.
“The serum drug levels went up significantly, but reassuringly they saw no meaningful safety signals,” according to Dr. Terrault. “This, I think, is initial reassuring information that we were all very much waiting for.”
Still, as the AASLD/IDSA guidelines point out, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir is not a recommended option for HCV treatment in end-stage renal disease.
“In general, I think glecapravir/pibrentasvir [Mavyret] has become the go-to drug for patients who have renal dysfunction because it’s a pangenic regimen, it doesn’t require use of sofosbuvir, and there’s no dose adjustment. But I would say you could encounter situations where you might want to use sofosbuvir, and for me that situation is typically those direct-acting, antiviral-experienced patients who have failed other therapies and you really need to use sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir [Vosevi] as your last or rescue therapy,” the hepatologist continued.
HCV in liver transplant recipients
“In the years before the direct-acting antivirals, treating transplant patients was always very challenging,” Dr. Terrault recalled. “They had very low response rates to therapy. That’s all gone away. Now we can say that liver transplant recipients who require treatment have response rates that are the same as in individuals who have not had a transplant. These patients are now being treated earlier and earlier after their transplant because you can do it safely.”
She pointed to a study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting by Kosh Agarwal, MD, of Kings College London. It involved 79 adults with recurrent genotypes 1-4 HCV infection post–liver transplant who were treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa) for 12 weeks with a total SVR rate of 96%.
“The nice thing about sofosbuvir/velpatasvir is there are no drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. Now it’s very easy to take care of these patients. The SVR rates are excellent,” Dr. Terrault observed.
The other combination that’s been studied specifically in liver transplant recipients, and in kidney transplant recipients as well, is glecapravir/pibrentasvir. In the MAGELLAN-2 study of 100 such patients with genotypes 1-6 HCV, the SVR rate was 99% with no drug-related adverse events leading to discontinuation.
Persons who inject drugs
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization want HCV eradicated by 2030. If that’s going to happen, physicians will have to become more comfortable treating the disease in injectable drug users, a population with a high prevalence of HCV. Several studies have now shown that very high SVR rates can be achieved with direct-acting antiviral regimens as short as 8 weeks in these individuals, even if they are concurrently injecting drugs.
“There is increasing evidence that we should be doing more treatment in persons who inject drugs. Many of these individuals have very early disease and their response rates are excellent,” according to Dr. Terrault.
Moreover, their reinfection rates “are not outrageous,” she said: 1% or less in individuals who stopped injecting drugs decades prior to anti-HCV treatment, 5%-10% over the course of 3-5 years in those who continue injecting drugs after achieving SVR, and about 2% in those on methadone substitution therapy.
“These are very acceptable levels of reinfection if our goal is to move toward elimination of hepatitis C in this population,” she said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
MAUI, HAWAII – Treatment of acute rather than chronic hepatitis C infection is well worth considering in selected circumstances, Norah Terrault, MD, asserted at the Gastroenterology Updates, IBD, Liver Disease meeting.
This is not at present guideline-recommended therapy. Current American Association for the Study of Liver Disease/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidance states that while there is emerging data to support treatment of acute hepatitis C, the evidence isn’t yet sufficiently robust to support a particular regimen or duration. The guidelines currently recommend waiting 6 months to see if the acute infection resolves spontaneously, as happens in a minority of cases, or becomes chronic, at which point it becomes guideline-directed treatment time. But Dr. Terrault believes persuasive evidence to back treatment of acute hepatitis C infection (HCV) is forthcoming, and she noted that the guidelines leave the door ajar by stating, “There are instances wherein a clinician may decide that the benefits of early treatment outweigh waiting for possible spontaneous clearance.”
Treatment of acute HCV
Dr. Terrault deems treatment of acute HCV warranted in circumstances in which there is significant danger of transmission from the acutely infected individual to others. For example, health care providers with a needlestick HCV infection, injecting drug users, and men with acute HCV/HIV coinfection. She also treats acute HCV in patients with underlying chronic liver disease.
“Clearly, I wouldn’t want those individuals to have any worsening of their liver function, so I would treat them acutely,” explained Dr. Terrault, professor of medicine and director of the Viral Hepatitis Center at the University of California, San Francisco.
She cited as particularly impressive the results of the SWIFT-C trial presented by Suzanna Naggie, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., at the 2017 AASLD annual meeting. In this modest-size, National Institutes of Health–sponsored, multicenter study of HIV-infected men with acute HCV coinfection, the sustained viral response (SVR) rate with 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni) was 100%, regardless of their baseline HCV RNA level.
“I think this is remarkable. They cleared virus quite late and yet they went on to achieve HCV eradication. It highlights how little we really know about the treatment of individuals in this phase and that relying on HCV RNA levels may not tell the whole story. I think this is important data to suggest maybe when we treat acute hepatitis C we can use a shorter duration of treatment for that population. There are also other small studies testing 8 weeks of treatment in non–HIV-infected individuals with acute hepatitis C in which they also showed very high SVR rates,” the hepatologist said.
Copanelist Steven L. Flamm, MD, said that when he encounters a patient with acute HCV he, too, is prepared to offer treatment – he finds the available supporting evidence sufficiently compelling – but he often encounters a problem.
“Sometimes I’m blocked by insurance companies because this isn’t officially approved,” noted Dr. Flamm, professor of medicine and chief of the hepatology program at Northwestern University, Chicago.
“You’re right,” Dr. Terrault commented, “we have to make a pretty compelling argument to the insurer as to why we’re treating. But ‘treat to prevent transmission to others’ usually is successful in our hands.”
HCV in patients with end-stage renal disease
The product labeling for sofosbuvir (Sovaldi) says the drug’s safety and efficacy haven’t been established in patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease. However, a small multicenter study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting demonstrated that 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir achieved a 100% SVR rate in patients with genotype 1 HCV and severe renal impairment, including some on dialysis, with no clinically meaningful change in estimated glomerular filtration rate or any signal of cardiac arrhythmia.
“The serum drug levels went up significantly, but reassuringly they saw no meaningful safety signals,” according to Dr. Terrault. “This, I think, is initial reassuring information that we were all very much waiting for.”
Still, as the AASLD/IDSA guidelines point out, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir is not a recommended option for HCV treatment in end-stage renal disease.
“In general, I think glecapravir/pibrentasvir [Mavyret] has become the go-to drug for patients who have renal dysfunction because it’s a pangenic regimen, it doesn’t require use of sofosbuvir, and there’s no dose adjustment. But I would say you could encounter situations where you might want to use sofosbuvir, and for me that situation is typically those direct-acting, antiviral-experienced patients who have failed other therapies and you really need to use sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir [Vosevi] as your last or rescue therapy,” the hepatologist continued.
HCV in liver transplant recipients
“In the years before the direct-acting antivirals, treating transplant patients was always very challenging,” Dr. Terrault recalled. “They had very low response rates to therapy. That’s all gone away. Now we can say that liver transplant recipients who require treatment have response rates that are the same as in individuals who have not had a transplant. These patients are now being treated earlier and earlier after their transplant because you can do it safely.”
She pointed to a study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting by Kosh Agarwal, MD, of Kings College London. It involved 79 adults with recurrent genotypes 1-4 HCV infection post–liver transplant who were treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa) for 12 weeks with a total SVR rate of 96%.
“The nice thing about sofosbuvir/velpatasvir is there are no drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. Now it’s very easy to take care of these patients. The SVR rates are excellent,” Dr. Terrault observed.
The other combination that’s been studied specifically in liver transplant recipients, and in kidney transplant recipients as well, is glecapravir/pibrentasvir. In the MAGELLAN-2 study of 100 such patients with genotypes 1-6 HCV, the SVR rate was 99% with no drug-related adverse events leading to discontinuation.
Persons who inject drugs
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization want HCV eradicated by 2030. If that’s going to happen, physicians will have to become more comfortable treating the disease in injectable drug users, a population with a high prevalence of HCV. Several studies have now shown that very high SVR rates can be achieved with direct-acting antiviral regimens as short as 8 weeks in these individuals, even if they are concurrently injecting drugs.
“There is increasing evidence that we should be doing more treatment in persons who inject drugs. Many of these individuals have very early disease and their response rates are excellent,” according to Dr. Terrault.
Moreover, their reinfection rates “are not outrageous,” she said: 1% or less in individuals who stopped injecting drugs decades prior to anti-HCV treatment, 5%-10% over the course of 3-5 years in those who continue injecting drugs after achieving SVR, and about 2% in those on methadone substitution therapy.
“These are very acceptable levels of reinfection if our goal is to move toward elimination of hepatitis C in this population,” she said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
MAUI, HAWAII – Treatment of acute rather than chronic hepatitis C infection is well worth considering in selected circumstances, Norah Terrault, MD, asserted at the Gastroenterology Updates, IBD, Liver Disease meeting.
This is not at present guideline-recommended therapy. Current American Association for the Study of Liver Disease/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidance states that while there is emerging data to support treatment of acute hepatitis C, the evidence isn’t yet sufficiently robust to support a particular regimen or duration. The guidelines currently recommend waiting 6 months to see if the acute infection resolves spontaneously, as happens in a minority of cases, or becomes chronic, at which point it becomes guideline-directed treatment time. But Dr. Terrault believes persuasive evidence to back treatment of acute hepatitis C infection (HCV) is forthcoming, and she noted that the guidelines leave the door ajar by stating, “There are instances wherein a clinician may decide that the benefits of early treatment outweigh waiting for possible spontaneous clearance.”
Treatment of acute HCV
Dr. Terrault deems treatment of acute HCV warranted in circumstances in which there is significant danger of transmission from the acutely infected individual to others. For example, health care providers with a needlestick HCV infection, injecting drug users, and men with acute HCV/HIV coinfection. She also treats acute HCV in patients with underlying chronic liver disease.
“Clearly, I wouldn’t want those individuals to have any worsening of their liver function, so I would treat them acutely,” explained Dr. Terrault, professor of medicine and director of the Viral Hepatitis Center at the University of California, San Francisco.
She cited as particularly impressive the results of the SWIFT-C trial presented by Suzanna Naggie, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., at the 2017 AASLD annual meeting. In this modest-size, National Institutes of Health–sponsored, multicenter study of HIV-infected men with acute HCV coinfection, the sustained viral response (SVR) rate with 8 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (Harvoni) was 100%, regardless of their baseline HCV RNA level.
“I think this is remarkable. They cleared virus quite late and yet they went on to achieve HCV eradication. It highlights how little we really know about the treatment of individuals in this phase and that relying on HCV RNA levels may not tell the whole story. I think this is important data to suggest maybe when we treat acute hepatitis C we can use a shorter duration of treatment for that population. There are also other small studies testing 8 weeks of treatment in non–HIV-infected individuals with acute hepatitis C in which they also showed very high SVR rates,” the hepatologist said.
Copanelist Steven L. Flamm, MD, said that when he encounters a patient with acute HCV he, too, is prepared to offer treatment – he finds the available supporting evidence sufficiently compelling – but he often encounters a problem.
“Sometimes I’m blocked by insurance companies because this isn’t officially approved,” noted Dr. Flamm, professor of medicine and chief of the hepatology program at Northwestern University, Chicago.
“You’re right,” Dr. Terrault commented, “we have to make a pretty compelling argument to the insurer as to why we’re treating. But ‘treat to prevent transmission to others’ usually is successful in our hands.”
HCV in patients with end-stage renal disease
The product labeling for sofosbuvir (Sovaldi) says the drug’s safety and efficacy haven’t been established in patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease. However, a small multicenter study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting demonstrated that 12 weeks of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir achieved a 100% SVR rate in patients with genotype 1 HCV and severe renal impairment, including some on dialysis, with no clinically meaningful change in estimated glomerular filtration rate or any signal of cardiac arrhythmia.
“The serum drug levels went up significantly, but reassuringly they saw no meaningful safety signals,” according to Dr. Terrault. “This, I think, is initial reassuring information that we were all very much waiting for.”
Still, as the AASLD/IDSA guidelines point out, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir is not a recommended option for HCV treatment in end-stage renal disease.
“In general, I think glecapravir/pibrentasvir [Mavyret] has become the go-to drug for patients who have renal dysfunction because it’s a pangenic regimen, it doesn’t require use of sofosbuvir, and there’s no dose adjustment. But I would say you could encounter situations where you might want to use sofosbuvir, and for me that situation is typically those direct-acting, antiviral-experienced patients who have failed other therapies and you really need to use sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir [Vosevi] as your last or rescue therapy,” the hepatologist continued.
HCV in liver transplant recipients
“In the years before the direct-acting antivirals, treating transplant patients was always very challenging,” Dr. Terrault recalled. “They had very low response rates to therapy. That’s all gone away. Now we can say that liver transplant recipients who require treatment have response rates that are the same as in individuals who have not had a transplant. These patients are now being treated earlier and earlier after their transplant because you can do it safely.”
She pointed to a study presented at the 2017 AASLD meeting by Kosh Agarwal, MD, of Kings College London. It involved 79 adults with recurrent genotypes 1-4 HCV infection post–liver transplant who were treated with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (Epclusa) for 12 weeks with a total SVR rate of 96%.
“The nice thing about sofosbuvir/velpatasvir is there are no drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. Now it’s very easy to take care of these patients. The SVR rates are excellent,” Dr. Terrault observed.
The other combination that’s been studied specifically in liver transplant recipients, and in kidney transplant recipients as well, is glecapravir/pibrentasvir. In the MAGELLAN-2 study of 100 such patients with genotypes 1-6 HCV, the SVR rate was 99% with no drug-related adverse events leading to discontinuation.
Persons who inject drugs
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization want HCV eradicated by 2030. If that’s going to happen, physicians will have to become more comfortable treating the disease in injectable drug users, a population with a high prevalence of HCV. Several studies have now shown that very high SVR rates can be achieved with direct-acting antiviral regimens as short as 8 weeks in these individuals, even if they are concurrently injecting drugs.
“There is increasing evidence that we should be doing more treatment in persons who inject drugs. Many of these individuals have very early disease and their response rates are excellent,” according to Dr. Terrault.
Moreover, their reinfection rates “are not outrageous,” she said: 1% or less in individuals who stopped injecting drugs decades prior to anti-HCV treatment, 5%-10% over the course of 3-5 years in those who continue injecting drugs after achieving SVR, and about 2% in those on methadone substitution therapy.
“These are very acceptable levels of reinfection if our goal is to move toward elimination of hepatitis C in this population,” she said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM GUILD 2018