Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
Institute
- Medizin (3) (remove)
Background: Clinical practice guidelines for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) have been recently revised and implemented for well-established response criteria to standard first-line ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) therapy at 12 months after treatment initiation for the early identification of high-risk patients with inadequate treatment responses who may require treatment modification. However, there are only very limited data concerning the real-world clinical management of patients with PBC in Germany. Objective: The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to evaluate response rates to standard first-line UDCA therapy and subsequent Second-line treatment regimens in a large cohort of well-characterized patients with PBC from 10 independent hepatological referral centers in Germany prior to the introduction of obeticholic acid as a licensed second-line treatment option. Methods: Diagnostic confirmation of PBC, standard first-line UDCA treatment regimens and response rates at 12 months according to Paris-I, Paris-II, and Barcelona criteria, the follow-up cut-off alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ≤ 1.67 × upper limit of normal (ULN) and the normalization of bilirubin (bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN) were retrospectively examined between June 1986 and March 2017. The management and hitherto applied second-line treatment regimens in patients with an inadequate response to UDCA and subsequent response rates at 12 months were also evaluated. Results: Overall, 480 PBC patients were included in this study. The median UDCA dosage was 13.2 mg UDCA/kg bodyweight (BW)/d. Adequate UDCA treatment response rates according to Paris-I, Paris-II, and Barcelona criteria were observed in 91, 71.3, and 61.3% of patients, respectively. In 83.8% of patients, ALP ≤ 1.67 × ULN were achieved. A total of 116 patients (24.2%) showed an inadequate response to UDCA according to at least one criterion. The diverse second-line treatment regimens applied led to significantly higher response rates according to Paris-II (35 vs. 60%, p = 0.005), Barcelona (13 vs. 34%, p = 0.0005), ALP ≤ 1.67 × ULN and bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN (52.1 vs. 75%, p = 0.002). The addition of bezafibrates appeared to induce the strongest beneficial effect in this cohort (Paris II: 24 vs. 74%, p = 0.004; Barcelona: 50 vs. 84%, p = 0.046; ALP < 1.67 × ULN and bilirubin ≤ 1 × ULN: 33 vs. 86%, p = 0.001). Conclusion: Our large retrospective multicenter study confirms high response rates following UDCA first-line standard treatment in patients with PBC and highlights the need for close monitoring and early treatment modification in high-risk patients with an insufficient response to UDCA since early treatment modification significantly increases subsequent response rates of these patients.
Background: SNPs near the interferon lambda (IFNL) 3 gene are predictors for sustained virological response (SVR) in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype (GT) 1. In addition, a dinucleotide frame shift in ss469415590 was described, which generates IFNL4. In this study, we compared the role of IFNL4 variants with IFNL3-(rs12979860) and IFNL3-(rs8099917) on response to pegylated (PEG)-IFN and Ribavirin (RBV) in patients with chronic hepatitis C GT2/3.
Methods: We recruited 1006 patients with chronic hepatitis C and GT2/3 in a large German registry. A treatment with PEG-IFN and Ribavirin was started by 959 patients. We performed genotyping of IFNL3 (rs12979860, n = 726; rs8099917, n = 687) and of IFNL4 (ss469415590; n = 631).
Results: Both preferable IFNL3 genotypes were associated with RVR (both p<0.0001) rather than with SVR (rs12979860: p = 0.251; rs8099917: p = 0.447). Only RVR was linked to SVR in univariate and multivariate analyzes (both p<0.001). Concordance of genotyping in patients with available serum samples and EDTA blood samples (n = 259) was more than 96% for both IFNL3 SNPs. IFNL3-(rs12979860) correlated with IFNL4: 99.2% of patients with IFNL3-(rs12979860)-CC were IFNL4-(ss469415590)-TT/TT. IFNL3-(rs12979860)-CT was linked with IFNL4-(ss469415590)-TT/ΔG (98.0%) and IFNL3-(rs12979860)-TT was associated with IFNL4-(ss469415590)-ΔG/ΔG (97.6%).
Conclusion: IFNL3 genotyping from serum was highly efficient and can be used as an alternative if EDTA whole blood is not available. In Caucasian GT2/3 patients genotyping for INFL4-(ss469415590) does not lead to additional information for the decision-making process. Importantly, IFNL3 SNPs were not associated with SVR but with RVR. Even in the era of new direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapies, IFNL3 testing may therefore still be considered for naïve GT2/3 patients to decide if dual Peg-IFN/RBV therapy is an option in resource limited regions.
Evidence based clinical guidelines are implemented to treat patients efficiently that include efficacy, tolerability but also health economic considerations. This is of particular relevance to the new direct acting antiviral agents that have revolutionized treatment of chronic hepatitis C. For hepatitis C genotypes 2/3 interferon free treatment is already available with sofosbuvir plus ribavirin. However, treatment with sofosbuvir-based regimens is 10–20 times more expensive compared to pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV). It has to be discussed if PegIFN/RBV is still an option for easy to treat patients. We assessed the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C genotypes 2/3 with PegIFN/RBV in a real world setting according to the latest German guidelines. Overall, 1006 patients were recruited into a prospective patient registry with 959 having started treatment. The intention-to-treat analysis showed poor SVR (GT2 61%, GT3 47%) while patients with adherence had excellent SVR in the per protocol analysis (GT2 96%, GT3 90%). According to guidelines, 283 patients were candidates for shorter treatment duration, namely a treatment of 16 weeks (baseline HCV-RNA <800.000 IU/mL, no cirrhosis and RVR). However, 65% of these easy to treat patients have been treated longer than recommended that resulted in higher costs but not higher SVR rates. In conclusion, treatment with PegIFN/RBV in a real world setting can be highly effective yet similar effective than PegIFN± sofosbuvir/RBV in well-selected naïve G2/3 patients. Full adherence to guidelines could be further improved, because it would be important in the new era with DAA, especially to safe resources.