Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Adverse events (1)
- Chronic Hepatitis C (1)
- DAA (1)
- Decision trees (1)
- Drug (1)
- Drug therapy (1)
- EQ-5D (1)
- FSS (1)
- Fibrosis (1)
- Hepatitis C virus (1)
- Multivariate analysis (1)
- PROMISE (1)
- Regression analysis (1)
- TMC435 (1)
- Viral load (1)
- fatigue (1)
- hepatitis C virus (1)
- patient-reported outcomes (1)
- peginterferon-α (1)
- ribavirin (1)
- simeprevir (1)
- triple therapy (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
Background & Aims: Simeprevir is an oral, once-daily inhibitor of hepatitis c virus (HCV) protease NS3/4A. We investigated the safety and efficacy of simeprevir with peg-interferon α-2a and ribavirin (PR) in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who relapsed after previous interferon-based therapy.
Methods: Patients were assigned randomly (2:1) to groups given simeprevir (150 mg, once daily) and PR (n = 260) or placebo and PR (n = 133) for 12 weeks. Patients then were given PR alone for 12 or 36 weeks (simeprevir group, based on response-guided therapy criteria) or 36 weeks (placebo group).
Results: Simeprevir and PR was significantly superior to placebo and PR; rates of sustained virologic response 12 weeks after planned end of treatment (SVR12) were 79.2% vs 36.1%, respectively (43.8% difference; 95% confidence interval, 34.6–53.0; P < .001). Among patients given simeprevir, 92.7% met the response-guided therapy criteria and were eligible to complete PR at week 24; of these, 83.0% achieved SVR12. HCV RNA was undetectable at week 4 in 77.2% of patients given simeprevir and 3.1% given placebo. On-treatment failure and relapse rates were lower among patients given simeprevir and PR than those given placebo and PR (3.1% vs 27.1%, and 18.5% vs 48.4%, respectively). Patients given simeprevir did not have adverse events beyond those that occurred in patients given PR alone. Most adverse events were grades 1/2; the prevalence of anemia and rash was similar in both groups. Patients in both groups reported similar severity of fatigue and functional impairments during the study, but duration was reduced among patients given simeprevir.
Conclusions: In a phase 3 trial of patients who had relapsed after interferon-based therapy, the addition of simeprevir to PR was generally well tolerated, with an SVR12 rate of 79.2%. Most patients (92.7%) receiving simeprevir were able to shorten therapy to 24 weeks. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01281839.
Background: Shortening duration of peginterferon-based HCV treatment reduces associated burden for patients. Primary objectives of this study were to assess the efficacy against the minimally acceptable response rate 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12) and safety of simeprevir plus PR in treatment-naïve HCV GT1 patients treated for 12 weeks. Additional objectives included the investigation of potential associations of rapid viral response and baseline factors with SVR12.
Methods: In this Phase III, open-label study in treatment-naïve HCV GT1 patients with F0–F2 fibrosis, patients with HCV-RNA <25 IU/mL (detectable/undetectable) at Week 2, and undetectable HCV-RNA at Weeks 4 and 8, stopped all treatment at Week 12. All other patients continued PR for a further 12 weeks. Baseline factors significantly associated with SVR12 were identified through logistic regression.
Results: Of 163 patients who participated in the study, 123 (75%) qualified for 12-week treatment; of these, 81 (66%) achieved SVR12. Baseline factors positively associated with SVR12 rates in patients receiving the 12-week regimen were: IL28B CC genotype: (94% SVR12); HCV RNA ≤800,000 IU/mL (82%); F0–F1 fibrosis (74%). Among all 163 patients, 94% experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE), 4% a serious AE, and 2.5% discontinued due to an AE. Reduced impairment in patient-reported outcomes was observed in the 12-week vs >12-week regimen.
Conclusions: Overall SVR12 rate (66%) was below the target of 80%, indicating that shortening of treatment with simeprevir plus PR to 12 weeks based on very early response is not effective. However, baseline factors associated with higher SVR12 rates were identified. Therefore, while Week 2 response alone is insufficient to predict efficacy, GT1 patients with favourable baseline factors may benefit from a shortened simeprevir plus PR regimen.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01846832
Background: Fatigue is a common symptom of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and a frequent side-effect of peginterferon/ribavirin (PR) therapy for HCV. This study evaluated the impact of adding the oral HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor simeprevir to PR on patient-reported fatigue and health status among patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection enrolled in the Phase IIb PILLAR and ASPIRE trials [NCT00882908; NCT00980330].
Methods: Treatment-naïve patients (PILLAR, n = 386) and treatment-experienced patients (ASPIRE, n = 462) were randomized to simeprevir plus PR (simeprevir/PR) or placebo plus PR (placebo/PR). In PILLAR, duration of PR treatment in the simeprevir/PR groups was determined using response-guided therapy (RGT) criteria. PR could be terminated at Week 24, instead of Week 48, if HCV RNA was <25 IU/mL by Week 4 and then undetectable at Weeks 12, 16, and 20. In both studies, patients completed the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) and EQ-5D quality-of-life questionnaire in their native language at baseline and throughout the studies up until Week 72.
Results: During the first 24 weeks of treatment, mean FSS total score was increased to a similar degree compared with baseline among patients receiving simeprevir/PR or placebo/PR in both studies indicating increased fatigue severity. Mean FSS scores returned to values comparable with baseline among patients receiving simeprevir/PR after Week 24 in PILLAR (after treatment completion for the majority of patients) and in ASPIRE (after Week 48), consistent with RGT enabling early termination of all treatment at Week 24 in 82.2% of simeprevir/PR-treated patients in the PILLAR study. Similar results were observed for EQ-5D, with simeprevir/PR-treated patients experiencing less time with worse health problems according to EQ-5D scores compared with placebo/PR groups in both studies, and more rapid improvement in health status associated with shorter treatment duration in the PILLAR study.
Conclusions: Combination of simeprevir with PR did not increase patient-reported fatigue severity or health status impairments beyond that reported by patients treated with PR alone. Many patients treated with simeprevir/PR returned to pretreatment fatigue and health status levels sooner due to increased treatment efficacy that enabled shorter duration of all therapy, compared with PR alone.