Showing posts with label Insulin Resistance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Insulin Resistance. Show all posts

February 26, 2014

Hepatitis C virus infection and insulin resistance

World J Diabetes. 2014 February 15; 5(1): 52-58.

Published online 2014 February 15. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v5.i1.52.

Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.

Sandip K Bose and Ranjit Ray.

Sandip K Bose, Ranjit Ray, Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO 63104, United States

Ranjit Ray, Division of Infectious Diseases, Allergy and Immunology, Edward A Doisy Research Center, St. Louis, MO 63104, United States

Ranjit Ray, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO 63104, United States

Author contributions: Bose SK performed literature search and wrote the initial draft of the paper; Ray R edited the paper and made additional changes as needed.

Supported by The National Institutes of Health, NO. DK080812

Correspondence to: Ranjit Ray, PhD, Division of Infectious Diseases, Allergy and Immunology, Edward A Doisy Research Center, 1100 S. Grand Blvd., 8th Floor, St. Louis, MO 63104, United States. rayr@slu.edu

Telephone: +1-314- 9779034 Fax: +1-314-7713816

Received November 9, 2013; Revised December 20, 2013; Accepted January 13, 2014;

Abstract

Approximately 170 million people worldwide are chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Chronic HCV infection is the leading cause for the development of liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and is the primary cause for liver transplantation in the western world. Insulin resistance is one of the pathological features in patients with HCV infection and often leads to development of type II diabetes. Insulin resistance plays an important role in the development of various complications associated with HCV infection. Recent evidence indicates that HCV associated insulin resistance may result in hepatic fibrosis, steatosis, HCC and resistance to anti-viral treatment. Thus, HCV associated insulin resistance is a therapeutic target at any stage of HCV infection. HCV modulates normal cellular gene expression and interferes with the insulin signaling pathway. Various mechanisms have been proposed in regard to HCV mediated insulin resistance, involving up regulation of inflammatory cytokines, like tumor necrosis factor-α, phosphorylation of insulin-receptor substrate-1, Akt, up-regulation of gluconeogenic genes like glucose 6 phosphatase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 2, and accumulation of lipid droplets. In this review, we summarize the available information on how HCV infection interferes with insulin signaling pathways resulting in insulin resistance.

Keywords: Hepatitis C virus, Insulin resistance, Insulin receptor substrate 1, Protein kinase B, mammalian target of rapamycin/S6K1, Suppressor of cytokine signaling 3, Glucose transporter-4, Lipid metabolism, Anti-viral therapy

Core tip: Insulin resistance is one of the pathological features in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and often leads to development of type II diabetes. Recent evidence indicates that HCV associated insulin resistance may result in hepatic fibrosis, steatosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and resistance to anti-viral treatment. In this review, we summarize the available information on how HCV infection interferes with insulin signaling pathways.

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) contains a positive sense single stranded RNA genome and belongs to the family Flaviviridae and genus Hepacivirus[1]. HCV genome, 9.6 kb in length, is composed of a 5’ non-translated region (NTR), a long open reading frame (ORF) encoding a polyprotein and a 3’ NTR. The ORF encodes a polyprotein of about 3000 amino acids that is translated via an internal ribosome entry site at the 5’ NTR. The polyprotein is then cleaved by both cellular and viral proteases into at least 10 different proteins[1]. These include three structural proteins namely, core and two envelope glycoproteins (E1 and E2). In addition, a protein called F or ARFP can be produced from a frame-shift of the core protein[2]. An ion channel protein p7 is formed by cleavage of E2[3]. Non structural proteins of HCV include NS2, NS3, NS4A, NS4B, NS5A, and NS5B.

The primary host cell for HCV is hepatocytes but replication may also occur in other cell types, such as peripheral blood mononuclear cells, as well as in B and T cell lines[4,5]. HCV is a major cause of acute and chronic liver disease worldwide. More than 170 million people are currently infected with HCV[6]. Currently HCV vaccine is not available. Acute infection is usually asymptomatic, making early diagnosis difficult. Approximately 70% of acutely infected individuals fail to clear the virus and become chronically infected[7]. Chronic HCV infection is the leading cause for the development of liver fibrosis, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and is the primary cause for liver transplantation in the western world. The sustained antiviral response rate in treatment of chronic HCV infection with interferon (IFN)-α with ribavirin is limited (about 30%-40%)[8,9]. Boceprevir and telaprevir protease inhibitors, have been shown to exhibit significantly higher rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) against HCV genotype 1 (about 65%-75%) as compared with peginterferon-ribavirin alone[10,11]. However, use of these antiviral agents display higher incidence of adverse events, such as rash, gastrointestinal disorders, and anemia.

Insulin resistance plays an important role in the development of various complications associated with HCV infection. Recent evidence indicates that HCV associated insulin resistance may result in hepatic fibrosis, steatosis, HCC and resistance to anti-viral treatment[12]. Thus, HCV associated insulin resistance is a therapeutic target at any stage of HCV infection. HCV modulates normal cellular gene expression and interferes with the insulin signaling pathway. The aim of this review is to summarize the currently available information on how chronic HCV infection interferes with insulin signaling pathways resulting in insulin resistance.

GLUCOSE UPTAKE AND INSULIN RESISTANCE

Glucose is a key metabolite essential for the production of energy (mostly ATP) which is required by cells. There are several mechanisms underlying increased glucose production. These include production of free glucose by increased glycogenolysis in the liver, increased gluconeogenesis, activation of forkhead box transcription factor (FoxO1) and improper insulin-glucagon hormonal balance, which stimulates increased glucose production[13]. Several factors contribute to elevated gluconeogenesis in diabetes, namely (1) increased supply of glucogenic precursors to the liver (glycerol, amino acids, free fatty acids), (2) increased lipid content, (3) increased cytokines and adipokines, and (4) decreased insulin receptor (IR) signaling in hepatocytes[13]. Glucose uptake into cells is regulated by the action of specific hormones, namely insulin and glucagon. Insulin is a peptide hormone secreted by the β-cells of the pancreatic islets of langerhans and maintains normal blood glucose levels by facilitating cellular glucose uptake, regulating carbohydrate, lipid and protein metabolism and promoting cell division and growth through its mitogenic effects[14]. The ability of insulin to stimulate glucose uptake into tissues is central to the maintenance of whole-body glucose homeostasis[15]. Type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM), occurs when the production of insulin is not sufficient to overcome a difficulty the body has in properly using insulin. This difficulty is called insulin resistance, resulting in increased glucose levels. Both forms of diabetes can pose an increased risk of major lifelong complications. In the case of insulin resistance, this includes a fivefold increased risk of coronary vascular disease, diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy[16-19]. Fatty liver is relatively common in overweight and obese persons with T2DM and is an aspect of body composition related to severity of insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and inflammatory markers[20].

Glucose transporter-4 (GLUT-4) was shown to be the major isoform responsible for enhanced glucose uptake into muscle and adipose tissues following the secretion of insulin into the bloodstream[21,22]. The process of glucose uptake by cells requires a series of events to take place in a timely manner. It involves the binding of insulin to the IR resulting in subsequent phosphorylation and activation of IR substrate 1 and 2 (IRS-1/IRS-2), central molecules of the insulin signaling cascade[23,24]. This in turn activates protein kinase B (AKT) by phosphorylation of Ser473 and Thr308 residues. Activated AKT causes the translocation of GLUT-4 from intracellular compartments to the cell surface where it is required for glucose uptake[25]. Any change in the signaling is likely to induce insulin resistance which is associated with a number of pathophysiological changes including glucose intolerance, obesity, dyslipidemia and hypertension. Insulin resistance is a physiological condition in which cells fail to respond to the normal actions of the hormone insulin. The body produces insulin, but the cells in the body become resistant to insulin and are unable to use it as effectively, resulting in an attenuated biological response, leading to hyperglycemia[26]. Accumulation of ectopic lipid metabolites, activation of the unfolded protein response pathway, and innate immune pathways have all been implicated in the pathogenesis of insulin resistance[27]. During the course of insulin resistance several inflammatory cytokines and lipid metabolites, like free fatty acids, interrupt with the normal insulin signaling and promote T2DM.

CHRONIC HCV INFECTION AND INSULIN RESISTANCE

Epidemiological studies suggest that patients with chronic HCV infection have a significantly increased prevalence of T2DM as compared to hepatitis B virus infected patients[28-30]. Both insulin resistance and diabetes can adversely affect the course of chronic hepatitis C (CHC), leading to enhanced steatohepatitis and liver fibrosis[30-32]. Insulin resistance, associated with type 2 diabetes, can promote fatty liver, and excessive hepatic accumulation of fat may promote insulin resistance and therefore contribute to the pathogenesis of the metabolic syndrome[33]. Insulin resistance is a critical component of type 2 diabetes mellitus pathogenesis. Several mechanisms are likely to be involved in the pathogenesis of HCV-related insulin resistance[34]. Several cellular lesions have been associated with insulin resistance, but the precise mechanism by which HCV induces insulin resistance remains elusive with numerous viewpoints and opinions[30].

Impairment of IRS-1 and IRS-2 expression has been observed in the liver of patients with chronic HCV infection, as well as in HCV core transgenic mice, and from in vitro cell culture system[35-38]. HCV mediates dysfunction of the insulin signaling pathways via several distinct mechanisms, such as upregulating the expression of suppressors of cytokine signaling 3 expression[35], down regulation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors gamma (PPARγ)[36], activation of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)/S6K1 pathway[38], and increased tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) secretion[39].

MODULATION OF IR SUBSTRATE BY HCV

HCV modulates insulin signaling and IRS-1 via multiple mechanisms which have been presented in Figure 1. Ser/Thr phosphorylation of IRS-1 inhibits its association with the IR, which in turn inhibits tyrosine phosphorylation of IRS-1, required for its activation, and promotes degradation. Upregulation of serine phosphorylation of IRS-1 is a key negative feedback mechanism under physiological conditions to prevent the action of insulin. In an insulin-resistant state, an imbalance occurs between positive IRS-1 Tyr-phosphorylation and negative Ser-phosphorylation of IRS-1[40]. HCV core protein expression in hepatocytes upregulates Ser312 phosphorylation status of IRS-1 and modulates downstream Akt activity by inhibiting Thr308 phosphorylation[37]. Ser312 and Ser1101 phosphorylation of IRS-1 inhibits its association with the IR and stimulates degradation. HCV core protein induces insulin resistance by increasing Ser312 and Ser 1101 phosphorylation, marking its for degradation via the activated mTOR/S6K1 pathway[38], and subsequently blocking Tyr- phosphorylation of IRS-1 and Thr308 phosphorylation of Akt for the inhibition of glucose uptake. Activation of mTOR signaling also plays a key role in modulating IRS-1 activity. HCV genotype 2a infection significantly downregulates the expression of TSC1/TSC2, which in turn results in activation of downstream mTOR and S6K1[38]. Phosphorylation of IRS-1 at Ser1101 via the mTOR-S6K1 pathway may release IRS-1 from intracellular complexes, thereby enabling its degradation[41]. HCV significantly increases Ser1101 phosphorylation of IRS-1, which enables its degradation[38].

WJD-5-52-g001

Figure 1 Schematic showing the interference of Hepatitis C virus in the insulin signaling pathway. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) core protein is known to up regulate Ser312 phosphorylation of insulin receptor substrate (IRS)-1 leading to degradation of IRS-1, the key molecule involved in propagation of insulin signal downstream from the insulin receptor (IR). HCV infection is also known to down regulate TSC1/TSC2 complex, resulting in subsequent upregulation of mTOR/S6K1 which leads to Ser1101 phosphorylation of IRS-1 and its subsequent degradation. A role of HCV mediated upregulation of SOCS3 and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) has also been proposed which leads to degradation and blocking of IRS-1 function. HCV also upregulates glucose 6 phosphatase (G6P), phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 2 (PCK2) leading to increased glucose production, and down regulates glucose transporter (GLUT)-4, GLUT-2, leading to decreased glucose uptake by hepatocytes. Overall, these alterations lead to insulin resistance. mTOR: Mammalian target of rapamycin.

A decrease in expression of IRS-1 and IRS-2, in patients with HCV infection has also been reported[35]. Down-regulation of IRS-1 and IRS-2 was also seen in HCV core-transgenic mice livers and HCV core-transfected human hepatoma cells[35]. HCV core up-regulated suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 (SOCS3) and caused ubiquitination of IRS-1 and IRS-2. HCV core-induced down-regulation of IRS-1 and IRS-2 was not seen in SOCS3(-/-) mouse embryonic fibroblast cells, indicating the important role played by SOCS3 in mediating down regulation of IRS-1[35]. There have been reports that HCV genotypes might play an important role in deciding the pathway by which it impairs insulin signaling. It has been shown that the core protein of HCV genotype 3a promoted IRS-1 degradation through the downregulation of PPARγ and by upregulating the SOCS7, the core protein of genotype 1b activated the mTOR[36].

TNF-α, released in an excess may promote phosphorylation of serine residues of IRS-1 eventually leading to the downregulation of downstream insulin signaling molecule Akt. HCV core protein increases the expression level of TNF-α and promotes insulin resistance[42].

IMPAIRED LIPID AND GLUCOSE METABOLISM BY HCV

Insulin resistance is strongly influenced by abnormalities in lipid metabolism. Any dysfunction of the lipid metabolism triggers lipotoxicity through the production of free fatty acids thereby promoting insulin resistance[43]. HCV core protein down-regulates microsomal triglyceride transfer protein, an enzyme that mediates lipid translocation to the endoplasmic reticulum membrane and decreases the assembly of very low density lipoproteins[44]. It has been observed that HCV promotes fatty acid synthesis by the upregulation of lipogenic gene sterol regulatory element binding protein 1c which promotes the transcriptional activation of other lipogenic genes like acetyl CoA carboxylase, ATP citrate lyase, hydroxymethylglutaryl CoA reductase[45].

HCV infection promotes the expression of gluconeogenic genes namely, glucose 6 phosphatase (G6P) and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 2 (PCK2) resulting in increased glucose production and enhanced insulin resistance[46,38]. HCV also down regulates the expression of GLUT4, which is necessary for uptake of glucose. This results in a decreased glucose uptake and increased plasma glucose, leading to development of insulin resistance[38].

A schematic showing how HCV interferes with insulin signaling pathway, leading to insulin resistance is presented in (Figure 1). HCV modulates functioning of IRS-1 via multiple mechanisms, including up regulation of Ser312 or Ser1101 phosphorylation which leads to degradation of IRS-1. HCV also upregulates SOCS3 and down regulates TSC1/TSC2 leading to blocking of insulin signaling. HCV infection leads to increased gluconeogenesis via up regulation of G6P and PCK2. GLUT-4, and GLUT-2 expression is also down regulated by HCV leading to decreased glucose uptake. Overall, all these alterations by HCV leads to development of insulin resistance.

INSULIN RESISTANCE AND LIVER DISEASE PROGRESSION

The metabolic syndrome is a constellation of problems that includes insulin resistance, obesity, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia[47]. Increasingly, components of the metabolic syndrome are being linked to various forms of cancer, including the risk of developing HCC. IR is induced by HCV-4 irrespective of severity of liver disease. IR starts early in infection and facilitates progression of hepatic fibrosis and HCC development[47]. HCC patients showed higher IR frequency, and moderate to high viral load associated with high HOMA-IR in CHC and HCC[47]. Insulin resistance associates with a higher risk of HCC in cirrhotic HIV/HCV-co-infected patients also[48]. There are many causes of HCC, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NASH) is emerging as a leading risk factor owing to the epidemic of obesity and T2DM. The mechanisms leading to HCC in obesity and T2DM likely involve interactions between several signaling pathways, many of which are modulated by HCV infection, and also include oxidative stress, inflammation, oncogenes, adiponectins, and insulin resistance associated with visceral adiposity and diabetes[49].

Insulin resistance and subsequent hyperinsulinemia are highly associated with fatty liver disease and is an important risk factor for the progression of fibrosis in CHC[50,51]. From metabolic aspect, HCV infection resembles NASH in numerous features, such as the presence of steatosis, serum dyslipidemia, and oxidative stress in the liver[52]. On the other hand, there are noticeable differences between hepatitis C and NASH, in the fact that HCV modulates cellular gene expression and intracellular signal transduction pathways, while such details have not been noted for NASH. HCV core protein expression leads to the development of progressive hepatic steatosis and HCC in transgenic mice[53]. Hepatic steatosis is known to occur at a high rate (40%-86%) in chronic HCV patients, and a close relationship between steatosis and intrahepatic core protein expression has been noted[54]. Insulin resistance is a prominent mechanism linking steatosis and fibrogenesis although this link is complex and not properly understood.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS OF HCV-MEDIATED INSULIN RESISTANCE

Several epidemiological, clinical and experimental data show that HCV plays a direct role in perturbing glucose metabolism, leading to both insulin resistance and diabetes[28-30]. Curing HCV results in the amelioration of insulin resistance and decreased incidence of diabetes after the end of therapy[55,56]. In the only trial that used the antidiabetic metformin[57], only a marginal, nonsignificant increase of the SVR rate was observed, despite an increased virological response after 4 wk of triple therapy. The data reported in a study using different schedules containing the antiglycaemic PPAR-γ agonist pioglitazone[58] are discouraging. Overall, the administration of insulin sensitizers together with the standard of care has not only failed to improve the virological response to therapy, but has also fallen short of providing much useful insight into the mechanisms linking reduced response to insulin resistance[59]. Early sulfonylureas although useful in lowering blood glucose level, were associated with significant off-target effects, and the biguanide phenformin was discontinued due to adverse events[60]. Although metformin is in the same drug class, it has a better safety profile and is now recommended as first-line treatment of diabetes during HCV infection.

THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES AND FUTURE GOALS

Treatment for HCV induced insulin resistance is highly linked with anti-viral treatment. Treatment of chronic HCV infection has 2 goals. The first is to achieve SVR (i.e., sustained eradication of HCV, which is defined as the persistent absence of HCV RNA in serum 6 mo or more after completing antiviral treatment). The second goal is to prevent progression to cirrhosis, HCC, and decompensated liver disease requiring liver transplantation. The treatment of HCV has evolved over the years. Current treatment options include combination therapy consisting of ribavirin and pegylated IFN. Protease inhibitors are emerging as a third feature of combination therapy. The sustained antiviral response rate in treatment of chronic HCV infection with IFN-α and ribavirin is limited (about 30%-40%)[8,9]. Boceprevir and telaprevir protease inhibitors have been shown to exhibit significantly higher rates of SVR against HCV genotype 1 (65%-75%) as compared with peginterferon-ribavirin alone[10,11]. More recently, sofosbuvir has also been used for treatment along with ribavirin, with significant increased SVR[61]. However, use of these antiviral agents display higher incidence of adverse events, such as rash, gastrointestinal disorders, and anemia. Thus, development of therapies with less side effects is desirable.

The prevalence of HCV antibodies in the type 2 diabetic population ranges between 1.78% and 12.1%[62]. Several cross-sectional studies have found a higher prevalence of HCV antibodies in type 2 diabetic patients than expected in the general population[62,63]. Early phase and total insulin secretion are determined using oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT), Insulin sensitivity was measured directly by steady-state plasma glucose concentration during insulin suppression test. Fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dL or 2-h plasma glucose > 200 mg/dL during OGTT are generally used as criteria for diagnosis of diabetes[64]. Well controlled DM was defined when the HbA1c level was < 7%. Agents used in diabetic therapy include the following: sulfonylureas, biguanides, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, Meglitinide derivativesetc[60]. Although effective in reducing blood glucose levels, early sulfonylureas were associated with significant off-target effects, and the biguanide phenformin was discontinued due to adverse events[60]. Although metformin is in the same drug class, it has a better safety profile and is now recommended as first-line treatment. However, many patients require additional glucose control treatment with an agent that has a complementary mechanism of action like metformin. Some common drugs used for treatment of T2DM available in the market include metformin oral, actos oral, Byetta subQ, Januvia oral, etc.

Another possible way of reversing insulin resistance would be via targeting the signaling components in the insulin signaling pathway modulated by HCV. For instance, we have shown that HCV up regulates phospho-S6K1, which stimulates degradation of IRS-1[38]. Thus, targeting phospho-S6K1 would be a target against HCV induced insulin resistance. These studies have not been done yet, so at this time it will be difficult to comment on the predictive outcome on reversal of insulin resistance. Use of specific inhibitors of SOCS-3, which may become useful to correct resistance to both insulin and IFN-α, are not available for clinical use. Alternatively, one may envision inhibiting TNF-α by administering infliximab or similar agents. IR also results from uncontrolled diet and life style. Regulation of weight, diet, and life style management will also be key in managing IR.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank and Lin Cowick for preparation of the manuscript.

Footnotes

P- Reviewers: Efanov AM, Teeter JG, Traub M, Vestergaard ET S- Editor: Zhai HH L- Editor: A E- Editor: Liu SQ

References

1.Kato N. Genome of human hepatitis C virus (HCV): gene organization, sequence diversity, and variation. Microb Comp Genomics. 2000;5:129-151. [PubMed]

2.Walewski JL, Keller TR, Stump DD, Branch AD. Evidence for a new hepatitis C virus antigen encoded in an overlapping reading frame. RNA. 2001;7:710-721. [PubMed]

3.Pavlović D, Neville DC, Argaud O, Blumberg B, Dwek RA, Fischer WB, Zitzmann N. The hepatitis C virus p7 protein forms an ion channel that is inhibited by long-alkyl-chain iminosugar derivatives. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:6104-6108. [PubMed] [DOI]

4.Castillo I, Rodríguez-Iñigo E, Bartolomé J, de Lucas S, Ortíz-Movilla N, López-Alcorocho JM, Pardo M, Carreño V. Hepatitis C virus replicates in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients with occult hepatitis C virus infection. Gut. 2005;54:682-685. [PubMed] [DOI]

5.Revie D, Salahuddin SZ. Human cell types important for hepatitis C virus replication in vivo and in vitro: old assertions and current evidence. Virol J. 2011;8:346. [PubMed] [DOI]

6.Alter HJ, Seeff LB. Recovery, persistence, and sequelae in hepatitis C virus infection: a perspective on long-term outcome. Semin Liver Dis. 2000;20:17-35. [PubMed]

7.Hoofnagle JH. Course and outcome of hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2002;36:S21-S29. [PubMed] [DOI]

8.Hoofnagle JH, di Bisceglie AM. The treatment of chronic viral hepatitis. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:347-356.[PubMed] [DOI]

9.Moradpour D, Blum HE. Current and evolving therapies for hepatitis C. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999;11:1199-1202. [PubMed]

10.Jacobson IM, McHutchison JG, Dusheiko G, Di Bisceglie AM, Reddy KR, Bzowej NH, Marcellin P, Muir AJ, Ferenci P, Flisiak R, George J, Rizzetto M, Shouval D, Sola R, Terg RA, Yoshida EM, Adda N, Bengtsson L, Sankoh AJ, Kieffer TL, George S, Kauffman RS, Zeuzem S; ADVANCE Study Team.Telaprevir for previously untreated chronic hepatitis C virus infection. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2405-2416. [PubMed] [DOI]

11.Bacon BR, Gordon SC, Lawitz E, Marcellin P, Vierling JM, Zeuzem S, Poordad F, Goodman ZD, Sings HL, Boparai N. Boceprevir for previously treated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1207-1217. [PubMed] [DOI]

12.El-Zayadi AR, Anis M. Hepatitis C virus induced insulin resistance impairs response to anti viral therapy. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:212-224. [PubMed] [DOI]

13.Lin HV, Accili D. Hormonal regulation of hepatic glucose production in health and disease. Cell Metab. 2011;14:9-19. [PubMed] [DOI]

14.Wilcox G. Insulin and insulin resistance. Clin Biochem Rev. 2005;26:19-39. [PubMed]

15.Leney SE, Tavaré JM. The molecular basis of insulin-stimulated glucose uptake: signalling, trafficking and potential drug targets. J Endocrinol. 2009;203:1-18. [PubMed] [DOI]

16.

Ginsberg HN. Insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease. J Clin Invest. 2000;106:453-458. [PubMed] [DOI]

17.McFarlane SI, Banerji M, Sowers JR. Insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001;86:713-718. [PubMed] [DOI]

18.Abcouwer SF. Angiogenic Factors and Cytokines in Diabetic Retinopathy. J Clin Cell Immunol. 2013;:(11).[PubMed] [DOI]

19.Hussain G, Rizvi SA, Singhal S, Zubair M, Ahmad J. Serum levels of TNF-α in peripheral neuropathy patients and its correlation with nerve conduction velocity in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2013;7:238-242. [PubMed] [DOI]

20.Kelley DE, McKolanis TM, Hegazi RA, Kuller LH, Kalhan SC. Fatty liver in type 2 diabetes mellitus: relation to regional adiposity, fatty acids, and insulin resistance. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003;285:E906-E916.[PubMed] [DOI]

21.Birnbaum MJ. Identification of a novel gene encoding an insulin-responsive glucose transporter protein. Cell. 1989;57:305-315. [PubMed] [DOI]

22.Charron MJ, Brosius FC, Alper SL, Lodish HF. A glucose transport protein expressed predominately in insulin-responsive tissues. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1989;86:2535-2539. [PubMed]

23.Tamemoto H, Kadowaki T, Tobe K, Yagi T, Sakura H, Hayakawa T, Terauchi Y, Ueki K, Kaburagi Y, Satoh S. Insulin resistance and growth retardation in mice lacking insulin receptor substrate-1. Nature. 1994;372:182-186.[PubMed] [DOI]

24.Withers DJ, Gutierrez JS, Towery H, Burks DJ, Ren JM, Previs S, Zhang Y, Bernal D, Pons S, Shulman GI. Disruption of IRS-2 causes type 2 diabetes in mice. Nature. 1998;391:900-904. [PubMed] [DOI]

25.Olson AL, Knight JB. Regulation of GLUT4 expression in vivo and in vitro. Front Biosci. 2003;8:s401-s409.[PubMed]

26.Cefalu WT. Insulin resistance: cellular and clinical concepts. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2001;226:13-26.[PubMed]

27.Samuel VT, Shulman GI. Mechanisms for insulin resistance: common threads and missing links. Cell. 2012;148:852-871. [PubMed] [DOI]

28.Knobler H, Schattner A. TNF-{alpha}, chronic hepatitis C and diabetes: a novel triad. QJM. 2005;98:1-6.[PubMed] [DOI]

29.Moucari R, Asselah T, Cazals-Hatem D, Voitot H, Boyer N, Ripault MP, Sobesky R, Martinot-Peignoux M, Maylin S, Nicolas-Chanoine MH. Insulin resistance in chronic hepatitis C: association with genotypes 1 and 4, serum HCV RNA level, and liver fibrosis. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:416-423. [PubMed] [DOI]

30.Kawaguchi T, Sata M. Importance of hepatitis C virus-associated insulin resistance: therapeutic strategies for insulin sensitization. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:1943-1952. [PubMed] [DOI]

31.Adinolfi LE, Gambardella M, Andreana A, Tripodi MF, Utili R, Ruggiero G. Steatosis accelerates the progression of liver damage of chronic hepatitis C patients and correlates with specific HCV genotype and visceral obesity. Hepatology. 2001;33:1358-1364. [PubMed] [DOI]

32.Tazawa J, Maeda M, Nakagawa M, Ohbayashi H, Kusano F, Yamane M, Sakai Y, Suzuki K. Diabetes mellitus may be associated with hepatocarcinogenesis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Dig Dis Sci. 2002;47:710-715.[PubMed]

33.Weickert MO, Pfeiffer AF. Signalling mechanisms linking hepatic glucose and lipid metabolism. Diabetologia. 2006;49:1732-1741. [PubMed] [DOI]

34.Adinolfi LE, Durante-Mangoni E, Zampino R, Ruggiero G. Review article: hepatitis C virus-associated steatosis--pathogenic mechanisms and clinical implications. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22 Suppl 2:52-55. [PubMed]

35.Kawaguchi T, Yoshida T, Harada M, Hisamoto T, Nagao Y, Ide T, Taniguchi E, Kumemura H, Hanada S, Maeyama M. Hepatitis C virus down-regulates insulin receptor substrates 1 and 2 through up-regulation of suppressor of cytokine signaling 3. Am J Pathol. 2004;165:1499-1508. [PubMed]

36.Pazienza V, Clément S, Pugnale P, Conzelman S, Foti M, Mangia A, Negro F. The hepatitis C virus core protein of genotypes 3a and 1b downregulates insulin receptor substrate 1 through genotype-specific mechanisms. Hepatology. 2007;45:1164-1171. [PubMed] [DOI]

37.Banerjee S, Saito K, Ait-Goughoulte M, Meyer K, Ray RB, Ray R. Hepatitis C virus core protein upregulates serine phosphorylation of insulin receptor substrate-1 and impairs the downstream akt/protein kinase B signaling pathway for insulin resistance. J Virol. 2008;82:2606-2612. [PubMed] [DOI]

38.Bose SK, Shrivastava S, Meyer K, Ray RB, Ray R. Hepatitis C virus activates the mTOR/S6K1 signaling pathway in inhibiting IRS-1 function for insulin resistance. J Virol. 2012;86:6315-6322. [PubMed] [DOI]

39.Shintani Y, Fujie H, Miyoshi H, Tsutsumi T, Tsukamoto K, Kimura S, Moriya K, Koike K. Hepatitis C virus infection and diabetes: direct involvement of the virus in the development of insulin resistance. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:840-848. [PubMed]

40.Virkamäki A, Ueki K, Kahn CR. Protein-protein interaction in insulin signaling and the molecular mechanisms of insulin resistance. J Clin Invest. 1999;103:931-943. [PubMed] [DOI]

41.Fritsche L, Weigert C, Häring HU, Lehmann R. How insulin receptor substrate proteins regulate the metabolic capacity of the liver--implications for health and disease. Curr Med Chem. 2008;15:1316-1329. [PubMed]

42.Pal S, Polyak SJ, Bano N, Qiu WC, Carithers RL, Shuhart M, Gretch DR, Das A. Hepatitis C virus induces oxidative stress, DNA damage and modulates the DNA repair enzyme NEIL1. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25:627-634. [PubMed] [DOI]

43.Unger RH, Orci L. Lipotoxic diseases of nonadipose tissues in obesity. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000;24 Suppl 4:S28-S32. [PubMed]

44.Perlemuter G, Sabile A, Letteron P, Vona G, Topilco A, Chrétien Y, Koike K, Pessayre D, Chapman J, Barba G. Hepatitis C virus core protein inhibits microsomal triglyceride transfer protein activity and very low density lipoprotein secretion: a model of viral-related steatosis. FASEB J. 2002;16:185-194. [PubMed] [DOI]

45.Kim KH, Hong SP, Kim K, Park MJ, Kim KJ, Cheong J. HCV core protein induces hepatic lipid accumulation by activating SREBP1 and PPARgamma. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2007;355:883-888. [PubMed] [DOI]

46.Deng L, Shoji I, Ogawa W, Kaneda S, Soga T, Jiang DP, Ide YH, Hotta H. Hepatitis C virus infection promotes hepatic gluconeogenesis through an NS5A-mediated, FoxO1-dependent pathway. J Virol. 2011;85:8556-8568.[PubMed] [DOI]

47.Mohamed AA, Loutfy SA, Craik JD, Hashem AG, Siam I. Chronic hepatitis c genotype-4 infection: role of insulin resistance in hepatocellular carcinoma. Virol J. 2011;8:496. [PubMed] [DOI]

48.Salmon D, Bani-Sadr F, Loko MA, Stitou H, Gervais A, Durant J, Rosenthal E, Quertainmont Y, Barange K, Vittecoq D. Insulin resistance is associated with a higher risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic HIV/HCV-co-infected patients: results from ANRS CO13 HEPAVIH. J Hepatol. 2012;56:862-868. [PubMed] [DOI]

49.Siddique A, Kowdley KV. Insulin resistance and other metabolic risk factors in the pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Liver Dis. 2011;15:281-96, vii-x. [PubMed] [DOI]

50.Sheikh MY, Choi J, Qadri I, Friedman JE, Sanyal AJ. Hepatitis C virus infection: molecular pathways to metabolic syndrome. Hepatology. 2008;47:2127-2133. [PubMed] [DOI]

51.Banerjee A, Meyer K, Mazumdar B, Ray RB, Ray R. Hepatitis C virus differentially modulates activation of forkhead transcription factors and insulin-induced metabolic gene expression. J Virol. 2010;84:5936-5946.[PubMed] [DOI]

52.Bugianesi E, Manzini P, D’Antico S, Vanni E, Longo F, Leone N, Massarenti P, Piga A, Marchesini G, Rizzetto M. Relative contribution of iron burden, HFE mutations, and insulin resistance to fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver. Hepatology. 2004;39:179-187. [PubMed] [DOI]

53.Clément S, Pascarella S, Conzelmann S, Gonelle-Gispert C, Guilloux K, Negro F. The hepatitis C virus core protein indirectly induces alpha-smooth muscle actin expression in hepatic stellate cells via interleukin-8. J Hepatol. 2010;52:635-643. [PubMed] [DOI]

54.Moriya K, Fujie H, Shintani Y, Yotsuyanagi H, Tsutsumi T, Ishibashi K, Matsuura Y, Kimura S, Miyamura T, Koike K. The core protein of hepatitis C virus induces hepatocellular carcinoma in transgenic mice. Nat Med. 1998;4:1065-1067. [PubMed] [DOI]

55.Kawaguchi T, Ide T, Taniguchi E, Hirano E, Itou M, Sumie S, Nagao Y, Yanagimoto C, Hanada S, Koga H. Clearance of HCV improves insulin resistance, beta-cell function, and hepatic expression of insulin receptor substrate 1 and 2. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:570-576. [PubMed] [DOI]

56.Romero-Gómez M, Fernández-Rodríguez CM, Andrade RJ, Diago M, Alonso S, Planas R, Solá R, Pons JA, Salmerón J, Barcena R. Effect of sustained virological response to treatment on the incidence of abnormal glucose values in chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol. 2008;48:721-727. [PubMed] [DOI]

57.Romero-Gómez M, Diago M, Andrade RJ, Calleja JL, Salmerón J, Fernández-Rodríguez CM, Solà R, García-Samaniego J, Herrerías JM, De la Mata M, Moreno-Otero R, Nuñez O, Olveira A, Durán S, Planas R; Spanish Treatment of Resistance to Insulin in Hepatitis C Genotype 1 Group.Treatment of insulin resistance with metformin in naïve genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C patients receiving peginterferon alfa-2a plus ribavirin. Hepatology. 2009;50:1702-1708. [PubMed] [DOI]

58.Overbeck K, Genné D, Golay A, Negro F; Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver (SASL).Pioglitazone in chronic hepatitis C not responding to pegylated interferon-alpha and ribavirin. J Hepatol. 2008;49:295-298.[PubMed] [DOI]

59.Negro F. Steatosis and insulin resistance in response to treatment of chronic hepatitis C. J Viral Hepat. 2012;19 Suppl 1:42-47. [PubMed] [DOI]

60.Guthrie RM. Evolving therapeutic options for type 2 diabetes mellitus: an overview. Postgrad Med. 2012;124:82-89. [PubMed] [DOI]

61.Osinusi A, Meissner EG, Lee YJ, Bon D, Heytens L, Nelson A, Sneller M, Kohli A, Barrett L, Proschan M. Sofosbuvir and ribavirin for hepatitis C genotype 1 in patients with unfavorable treatment characteristics: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2013;310:804-811. [PubMed] [DOI]

62.Ozyilkan E, Erbaş T, Simşek H, Telatar F, Kayhan B, Telatar H. Increased prevalence of hepatitis C virus antibodies in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Intern Med. 1994;235:283-284. [PubMed]

63.Simó R, Hernández C, Genescà J, Jardí R, Mesa J. High prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection in diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:998-1000. [PubMed]

64.Mukhtar NA, Ayala C, Maher JJ, Khalili M. Assessment of factors associated with pre-diabetes in HCV infection including direct and dynamic measurements of insulin action. J Viral Hepat. 2012;19:480-487.[PubMed] [DOI]

Source

February 15, 2014

Interleukin 28B genotype and insulin resistance in chronic hepatitis C patients

Antivir Ther. 2014 Feb 12. doi: 10.3851/IMP2743. [Epub ahead of print]

Degasperi E, Valenti L, Aghemo A, De Francesco R, Rumi M, Soffredini R, Donnici L, Cheroni C, Fargion S, Zanoni V, Orsi E, Colombo M.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, an association between IL28B genotype and insulin-resistance (IR), known predictors of sustained virological response (SVR) to PegInterferon (PegIFN) and Ribavirin (Rbv) therapy, has been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of IR and IL28B genotype in two cohorts of well-characterized HCV patients.

METHODS: 480 non-diabetic HCV patients were analyzed: 391 patients who received PegIFN/Rbv in the MIST study, and 89 previously reported patients followed at a Metabolic Liver Diseases center. All were tested for IL28B rs12979860 SNP by RT-PCR and had IR measured by HOMA-IR. Staging of liver disease through liver biopsy was available for all patients.

RESULTS: 164 patients (34%) were IL28B CC. Mean HOMA-IR values did not differ according to IL28B genotype, being respectively 1.14 ± 0.79 in CC vs 1.14 ± 0.78 in CT/TT (p=1.0) in the first, and 2.4 ± 1.0 vs 2.5 ± 1.0 (p=0.7) in the second cohort. HOMA-IR>2 was not associated with IL28B genotype: 16/132 (12%) CC vs 31/259 (12%) CT/TT (p=1.0) in the first cohort, and 16/32 (50%) vs 37/57 (65%) (p=0.18) in the second. This held true also when using different HOMA cut-offs (>2.5, >3.0, >3.5, >4.0). In the MIST cohort, HOMA-IR>2 did not influence treatment outcome, SVR rates being 28/47 (60%) in HOMA-IR>2 vs 214/344 (62%) in HOMA-IR<2 (p= 0.8). IL28B genotype was a strong predictor of SVR: 84% (111/132) in CC vs 51% (131/259) in CT/TT patients (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: In two cohorts of non-diabetic HCV patients where IL28B genotype predicted treatment outcome, we found no association between IL28B genotype and HOMA-IR.

PMID: 24523350 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Source

February 6, 2014

The Relationship of Hepatitis C Virus Infection with Diabetes in the United States Population

Hepatology

Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online and citable. The final edited and typeset version of record will appear in future.)

Original

Constance E. Ruhl M.D., Ph.D.1,*, Andy Menke Ph.D.1, Catherine C. Cowie Ph.D.2,  James E. Everhart M.D., M.P.H.2

DOI: 10.1002/hep.27047

Copyright © 2014 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases

Publication History
Accepted manuscript online: 5 FEB 2014 10:25AM EST
Manuscript Accepted: 31 JAN 2014
Manuscript Revised: 5 DEC 2013
Manuscript Received: 20 SEP 2013

Keywords: insulin resistance; alanine aminotransferase;  gamma glutamyltransferase;  National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey;  epidemiology

ABSTRACT

An association of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with diabetes has been reported in many studies, but few have been population-based and applied standard criteria for diabetes diagnosis. We examined this relationship using recent population-based data from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. 15,128 adult participants in the 1999-2010 surveys had data on diabetes status and serum HCV antibody (anti-HCV) or HCV RNA. Using American Diabetes Association criteria, diabetes was defined as a health care provider diagnosis, serum hemoglobin A1C (A1C) ≥6.5%, or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥126 mg/dL; pre-diabetes as A1C 5.7%-<6.5% or FPG 100-<126 mg/dL; and normal glucose as A1C <5.7% and FPG <100 mg/dL. Odds ratios (OR) for diabetes and pre-diabetes, comparing persons with HCV infection to those without, were adjusted for demographics, BMI, C-reactive protein, smoking, drinking, and blood transfusion before 1992. Among participants without diabetes, we compared mean insulin resistance, estimated using homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR), by HCV status. The overall prevalence of anti-HCV+ was 1.7%, of HCV RNA+, 1.1%, of diabetes, 10.5%, and of pre-diabetes, 32.8%. The prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes did not differ by HCV status. In multivariate-adjusted analysis, diabetes remained unassociated with anti-HCV (OR=1.0, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.6-1.7) or with HCV RNA (OR=1.1, 95% CI, 0.6-1.9). In contrast, elevated alanine aminotransferase and gamma glutamyltransferase activities were associated with diabetes regardless of HCV status. HOMA-IR was not associated with HCV markers in unadjusted or multivariate-adjusted analyses (p>0.05). Conclusion. In the U.S. population, HCV was not associated with diabetes, or with insulin resistance among persons with normal glucose. Previously reported relationships of HCV with diabetes were possibly attributable to the effect of elevated liver enzymes. (Hepatology 2014;)

Source

January 8, 2014

Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: Prevalence, Influence on Age and Sex, and Relationship with Metabolic Syndrome and Insulin Resistance

International Journal of Gerontology
Volume 7, Issue 4 , Pages 194-198, December 2013

Hui-Yun Cheng, Horng-Yuan Wang, Wen-Hsiung Chang, Shee-Chan Lin, Cheng-Hsin Chu, Tsang-En Wang, Chuan-Chuan Liu, Shou-Chuan Shih

Received 14 April 2012; received in revised form 20 August 2012; accepted 1 February 2013. published online 28 May 2013.

Summary

Background/purpose

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common condition comprising a wide spectrum of liver damage strongly associated with type 2 diabetes, obesity, and hyperlipidemia. The pathogenesis of fatty liver is multifactorial, and it has been suggested that the presence of insulin resistance (IR) is an essential requirement for the accumulation of hepatocellular fat. Although NAFLD may affect people of any age, in general, increasing age is associated with increasing prevalence. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of fatty liver and its influence on age and sex; and to assess the association of different degrees of fatty liver to IR and metabolic syndrome.

Materials and methods

The study was performed in 8350 alcohol- and virus-negative individuals who underwent routine physical check-up at the health evaluation centre of Mackay Memorial Hospital, from February 2004 to May 2009. They underwent clinical examination, anthropometry, biochemical tests including serum fasting insulin, and routine liver ultrasonography. Steatosis was graded as absent, mild, moderate, or severe.

Results

The overall prevalence of fatty liver was 34.40% with the prevalence of fatty liver being significantly higher in males than in females (22.34 vs. 12.06%, p = 0.015). A progressive increase in the means of a homeostasis model assessment of IR (HOMA-IR), body mass index, systolic blood pressure, plasma triglyceride, alanine aminotransferase, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and glucose level and decrease in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05) was observed from the group without steatosis to the groups with mild, moderate, and severe steatosis. Severe steatosis was associated with the clustering of risk factors for metabolic syndrome. Individuals with metabolic syndrome and a more pronounced HOMA-IR had a higher prevalence of moderate to severe steatosis (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05) compared to those with HOMA-IR below the median.

Conclusion

Fatty liver can be considered as the hepatic consequence of metabolic syndrome, specifically IR. There is a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome and fatty liver among the elderly population. Metabolic disorders are closely related to fatty liver; moreover, fatty liver appears to be a good predictor for the clustering of risk factors for metabolic syndrome.

Keywords: hepatic metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

Source

December 19, 2013

Breaking the cycle of obesity, inflammation and disease

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:19-Dec-2013 Contact: Laura J. Williams
laurajw@umich.edu
734-615-4862
University of Michigan

Breaking the cycle of obesity, inflammation and disease

ANN ARBOR—Researchers at University of Michigan have illuminated an aspect of how the metabolic system breaks down in obesity. The findings provide additional evidence that a drug entering clinical trials at the university could reverse obesity, Type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease in humans.

In a paper scheduled for online publication in the journal eLife on Dec. 24, Alan Saltiel, the Mary Sue Coleman Director of the Life Sciences Institute, explains how, in obesity, fat cells stop responding to hormones known as catecholamines that trigger them to expend more energy. However, the fat cells of obese mice treated with a drug called amlexanox regained sensitivity to catecholamines, burned the excess energy and returned to normal size.

Next month, scientists at U-M will begin a placebo-controlled clinical trial of amlexanox to test its efficacy as a drug for treating obesity and diabetes in humans. Formulations of amlexanox are prescribed in different international markets to treat asthma and canker sores.

Obesity leads to a state of chronic, low-grade inflammation in liver and fat tissue. Scientists believe that inflammation links obesity and insulin resistance via a pathway called NFkB, which is involved in the regulation of a range of cellular processes and activated in obesity.

Activation of NFkB increases the levels of a pair of genes, IKKε and TBK1, which in turn reduce the ability of certain receptors in the fat cells of obese mice to respond to catecholamines like adrenaline, "fat-burning" hormones generated by the sympathetic nervous system in response to stress.

"We've suspected that in obesity, fat cells become less sensitive to catecholamines such as adrenaline, and that this reduced sensitivity in turn reduces energy expenditure, but the details of this haven't been fully understood," Saltiel said.

High levels of IKKε and TBK1 also resulted in lower levels of a second messenger molecule called cAMP, which increases energy expenditure by elevating fat burning.

Amlexanox interfered with the two enzymes and restored sensitivity to catecholamine, allowing the fat cells to burn energy.

In research published in February 2013, Saltiel found that amlexanox reversed obesity, diabetes and fatty liver in mice. The forthcoming eLife paper explains in part how amlexanox works.

"There is considerable evidence to suggest that in states of obesity, adipose tissue becomes less sensitive to catecholamines because IKKε and TBK1 act as a sort of brake on metabolism, and that this reduced sensitivity in turn reduces energy expenditure," Saltiel said. "By releasing the brake, amlexanox seems to free the metabolic system of mice to burn more and possibly store less energy in response to catecholamines."

###

Saltiel is the Mary Sue Coleman Director of the Life Sciences Institute, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also the John Jacob Abel Collegiate Professor in the Life Sciences and a professor of internal medicine and molecular and integrative physiology at the Medical School.

Other authors of the paper are Jonathan Mowers, Maeran Uhm, Shannon Reilly, Joshua Simon, Dara Leto, Shian-Huey Chiang and Louise Chang, all from U-M. Support for the research was provided by the Michigan Diabetes Research and Training Center.

Alan Saltiel Lab: http://www.lsi.umich.edu/facultyresearch/labs/saltiel

U-M Life Sciences Institute: http://www.lsi.umich.edu

Source

December 15, 2013

Does telaprevir possess a direct antidiabetic effect?

Liver International

Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online and citable. The final edited and typeset version of record will appear in future.)

Case Reports

Paulino Tallón de Lara1, Thomas Himschoot1, Jean-Louis Frossard1,  Francesco Negro1,2,*

DOI: 10.1111/liv.12440

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Publication History
Accepted manuscript online: 14 DEC 2013 03:48AM EST
Manuscript Accepted: 7 DEC 2013
Manuscript Revised: 30 OCT 2013
Manuscript Received: 15 AUG 2013

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/liv.12440

Keywords: hepatitis C; insulin resistance;  protease inhibitor;  type 2 diabetes

Abstract

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) induces insulin resistance, which improves upon viral clearance. Telaprevir is a protease inhibitor effective against HCV genotype 1. We report a case whose history suggests that telaprevir may induce some antidiabetic effect independently of its suppression of HCV. A 56-year old woman with obesity, type 2 diabetes treated with sitagliptin and metformin, and HCV-related cirrhosis was given triple therapy with pegylated interferon-alpha, ribavirin and telaprevir. After two weeks of treatment, HCV RNA was no longer detectable but the patient described a pronounced drop in the capillary glucose levels and episodes of hypoglycemia that compelled her to stop all antidiabetic treatment. One month after stopping telaprevir, she had to resume her antidiabetic treatment, despite a persisting virological response. Despite reaching a sustained virological response, her diabetes progressed. Although the suppression of HCV replication may have played a role in reducing glucose intolerance, the fact that this patient resumed her prior antidiabetic treatment upon completing the telaprevir treatment, while still aviremic, suggests that telaprevir may have an additional antidiabetic effect. Further evidence about the possible role and mechanisms of telaprevir as antidiabetic agent is warranted.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Source

November 7, 2013

Are metabolic factors still important in the era of direct antiviral agents in patients with chronic hepatitis C?

World J Gastroenterol. 2013 November 7; 19(41): 6947-6956.

Published online 2013 November 7. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.6947.

Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.

Alessandro Grasso, Federica Malfatti and Roberto Testa.

Alessandro Grasso, Federica Malfatti, Roberto Testa, Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, San Paolo Hospital, 17100 Savona, Italy

Author contributions: Grasso A collected the data and wrote the manuscript; Malfatti F critically revised the manuscript and contributed to the manuscript writing; and Testa R supervised the manuscript; all authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Correspondence to: Alessandro Grasso, MD, Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, San Paolo Hospital, Via Genova 38, 17100 Savona, Italy. a.grasso@asl2.liguria.it

Telephone: +39-19-8404280 Fax: +39-19-8404364

Received June 28, 2013; Revised July 27, 2013; Accepted August 16, 2013;

Abstract

The high rate of sustained viral response (SVR) to boceprevir or telaprevir-based triple therapy in hepatitis C (HCV)-related, non-cirrhotic naïve patients or relapsers to previous antiviral treatment leads clinicians to believe that the impact of metabolic host factors on SVR is minimal when triple therapy is used, unlike what is observed with the peginterferon and ribavirin schedules. This concept is strongly expressed by some opinion leaders on the basis of the data derived from sub-analyses of registrative trials as well as from a post-hoc analysis of the phase II C208 clinical trial. The perception of unrestrainable therapeutic success with the use of newer, more powerful antivirals is now reinforced by the brilliant results obtained with sofosbuvir, an HCV NS5B polymerase inhibitor, as well as by the data from the phase II and III studies on the various combinations of second-generation NS3/4A inhibitors and NS5A and/or NS5B inhibitors. However, a great deal of concern has emerged from the real world scenario in which patients are often older and have more comorbidities than patients in the “world of trials”. Furthermore, many of them have advanced fibrosis and previous failure with peginterferon and ribavirin treatment. Some data from the recent literature suggest that the host metabolic factors may play a minor but non-negligible role in these difficult-to-treat patients, an issue that will hopefully be investigated in further studies. This editorial aims to provide a detailed analysis of the role that host metabolic factors played in the past and what role they may play in the era of direct antiviral agents.

Keywords: Metabolic factors, Insulin resistance, Direct antiviral agents, Chronic hepatitis C

Core tip: This editorial explores the past and present role of metabolic factors by analyzing the data that has emerged from the post hoc analysis of registrative trials of direct antiviral-based treatment. Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and statin use proved to be predictors of sustained viral response (SVR) in both boceprevir and telaprevir-treated patients, respectively. Furthermore, HOMA-IR negatively influenced SVR in prior partial and null responders treated with telaprevir-based schedules. By transferring these data to the real world scenario in which patients have comorbidities, advanced fibrosis and prior failure to antiviral treatment, we believe that metabolic factors might play a non-negligible role in influencing antiviral response, even in triple therapy.

INTRODUCTION

More than 170 million people are chronically infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) worldwide[1], thus HCV has become the main cause of chronic liver disease leading to death from liver failure or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in many Western countries and in Japan[2]. Viral eradication resulting from antiviral treatment has led to a decrease in these complications. However, treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin, which has been the standard-of-care therapy for chronic hepatitis C for the last decade, has been able to cure only about 40%-50% of patients with hepatitis C genotype 1, the main strain in Europe and the United States[3-6].

Genotype 1 is the main viral-related variable associated with treatment failure[3,4]. However, a number of other pretreatment variables related to the virus (high viral load) and to the host (interleukin 28b polymorphism, age, overweight, metabolic factors), as well as on-treatment variables (4-wk negativization of viral load) have been shown to affect the response to anti-viral dual therapy[7-10].

HCV INFECTION AND METABOLIC SEQUELAE: WHAT WE LEARNED FROM THE PAST

Insulin resistance

Epidemiological data suggest that HCV interferes with glucose and lipid metabolism. Patients with diabetes show a greater prevalence of HCV as compared to the non-diabetic population[11]. Moreover, the prevalence of diabetes is significantly higher in chronic hepatitis C patients than in those with chronic liver disease other than HCV[12]. Furthermore, it is well known that HCV infection is an independent risk factor for developing diabetes[13]. These data suggest that HCV, rather than liver disease per se, predisposes patients to diabetes. The link between HCV and diabetes is the development of insulin resistance (IR), a metabolic prerogative of HCV (i.e., IR is more than six fold higher in HCV patients than in those with HBV)[14]. IR, hepatic steatosis and body mass index (BMI) are related in a genotype-dependent fashion. In fact, HCV genotype 3 exerts a direct cytopathic and steatogenic effect on hepatocytes, thus resulting in a higher prevalence of steatosis and a lower prevalence of IR compared with HCV genotype 1, which very quickly induces IR and some steatosis[15-17]. IR occurs very early in transgenic mice expressing the HCV core protein and may even precede the occurrence of hepatic steatosis, thus indicating that IR is not a consequence of hepatic steatosis[18], similarly to what is observed in humans[17]. Furthermore, IR is a pro fibro genetic stimulus[17], thus patients with high IR show more advanced liver fibrosis than patients with low IR[19]. Finally, the association between IR and high HCV RNA levels[14] suggests a complex interplay between viral replication and insulin action. HCV may induce over-expression of the suppressor of the cytokine signaling-3 (SOCS3) gene in liver tissue. This gene is involved in the interferon signaling pathway and is associated with poorer treatment outcome[20,21]. HCV core-induced SOCS3 may promote proteosomal degradation of the insulin receptor substrates 1 and 2 (IRS1/2), thus inducing severe hepatic IR[22,23]. Both SOCS3 over-expression and hepatic steatosis promote intra-hepatic and systemic lipid oxidation, thus leading to an imbalance of total glucose disposal in the muscles and resulting in peripheral (and not only hepatic) IR[24].

Direct involvement of HCV in glucose metabolism has also been demonstrated “in vivo”. In fact, there is robust evidence showing that IR improved significantly in patients with HCV genotype 1 who achieved SVR compared with patients who did not obtain viral clearance after treatment[25,26]. Furthermore, achieving viral clearance is demonstrated to significantly reduce the risk of both type 2 diabetes in retrospective cohorts[27] and of de novo IR in non-diabetic HCV patients[28].

Lipids

Hepatic steatosis is also related, in a genotype-specific manner[29], to a decrease in serum levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB), thus demonstrating the close link between HCV and lipids. A variable fraction of HCV in the serum circulates in lipo viro particles (LVP), with very-low-density-lipoprotein (VLDL) containing apoB and apoE. LVP reach the highest levels in the post prandial phase, suggesting that their formation is a dynamic process[30]. Very recently, a strong correlation between the maximum amount of LVP in vivo and both IR and metabolic syndrome was reported, suggesting that lipids may play a role in HCV-induced IR[31]. ApoE is considered the central component of the HCV-host lipid interaction, mediating HCV infectivity via lipoprotein receptors[32]. Lipoproteins (LP) are easily endocytosed, thus supporting the hypothesis that HCV can use this association with LP to adhere to the cell and subsequently enter the host cell by endocytosis[33]. Various cell surface receptors, including tetraspanin CD814, scavenger receptor class B member I, tight-junction proteins claudin-1 and occludin, and clathrin-mediated endocytosis have been proposed as entry factors for HCV, but the role each of them plays remains controversial. Recently, the Niemann-Pick type C1-like 1 (NPC1L1) gene receptor has come to the attention of researchers in the view of a potentially new therapeutic antiviral strategy since it is the possible target of the receptor-blocker drug ezetimibe[34,35].

Few and inconsistent data have been reported on serum lipid level modifications during interferon therapy. Increased total cholesterol and triglyceride levels have been observed with interferon treatment, with a subsequent drop to pretreatment levels of both after discontinuing therapy, but with different trends depending on the HCV genotype[36,37]. In a small population of patients with genotype 2 and 3, viral clearance induced serum level modifications of lanosterol, a cholesterol precursor, suggesting a direct viral interference with the enzymes of sterol synthesis[29].

The effects of IR on antiviral response to dual treatment

Patients with high IR show a slower decay of HCV viral load than patients with low IR, even in the very early phase of treatment (first 24 h), suggesting that hyperinsulinemia reduces the cellular response to pegylated-interferon[38]. Furthermore, high IR has been associated with a low rate of rapid viral response (RVR) in genotypes 1[39], 3[40] and 4[41].

Whether or not IR influences SVR rate has been a question of debate since 2005[9]. Two meta-analyses assessing the impact of IR on treatment outcome, both of which included fourteen studies with more than 2700 patients, were published in 2011[42,43]. However, among the studies which failed to find an association between IR and SVR, the main baseline HOMA value, an indirect measurement of IR[44,45], was < 3 and the prevalence of advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis was also low or even absent[42]. This observation supports the hypothesis that the HOMA value is predictive of response to antiviral treatment mainly in patients with advanced disease stage. Liver fibrosis is an event which may occur as a consequence of HCV-related chronic necroinflammatory activity or via HCV related IR, or probably both. However, non-HCV related IR (genetic, or related to true metabolic syndrome) may also occur since almost 25% of the general population has the metabolic syndrome stigmata[46]. On the basis of these data, we can assume that a proportion of patients with prevalent virus-related IR (likely those with lower fibrosis as well as a lower incidence of cardio-metabolic comorbidities) have lower HOMA values and a higher likelihood of SVR after antiviral treatment, whereas other HCV patients with prevalent metabolic IR (likely those with the phenotype of metabolic syndrome) have a higher probability of advanced fibrosis as well as higher HOMA levels and a lower probability of achieving SVR[28,42,47].

The effects of obesity and lipids on antiviral response to dual treatment

Obesity is another important metabolic cofactor that can affect antiviral response. It may induce IR and hepatic steatosis, both of which are associated with poor antiviral response either directly or by ultimately promoting liver fibrosis. However, it has been demonstrated that obesity is an independent negative predictor of response to antiviral treatment regardless of genotype and cirrhosis[7].

Obesity is now considered an inflammatory condition, resulting in an abnormal immune response to therapy. Adipose tissue secretes many proteins, including adipokines, which regulate hepatic and peripheral glucose and lipid metabolism. One of the adipokines secreted by adipose cells is leptin, whose expression is regulated by interleukin-1 (IL-1), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and insulin. Although leptin secretion from adipocytes provides antiobesity signals, obese patients have elevated levels of leptin. This suggests an intrinsic leptin resistance in the obese, a complex phenomenon involving increased levels of SOCS3, which impairs post-receptor signaling and leads to reduced adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activation[48,49].

Increased SOCS3 expression, which is associated with nonresponse to antiviral treatment[20], has been demonstrated to be independently associated with obesity in patients with chronic HCV viral genotype 1[50].

Regarding the role of circulating lipid levels on the efficacy of antiviral treatment, there are few, but concordant, data. Higher pretreatment total cholesterol and LDL-C[51,52], as well as lower triglyceride levels are independent variables associated with higher SVR rates[53].

The interplay of Interleukin 28b polymorphisms and metabolic variables

The relationship between IL28b polymorphisms and metabolic variables has been reported in several studies, thus emerging as a new and challenging issue. There is a close association between IL28b and lipid levels. In HCV genotype 1 patients, low apoE levels and higher LDL-C were associated with IL28b rs12979860 CC rather than CT/TT[54,55]. Both IL28CC and LDL-C were good predictors of SVR, but the predictive power of IL28CC was higher. Thus, the LDL-C level was found to be a significant predictor of SVR, mainly for IL28 heterozygous CT patients[56].

Furthermore, lower steatosis[57] as well as lower IR[58] have been seen in genotype 1 patients with IL28b rs12979860 CC. In a recent, large cohort of genotype 1 patients from Italy, IL28b rs12979860 CC was associated with higher levels of total and LDL-C, lower levels of triglycerides, lower prevalence of IR and moderate-to-severe steatosis. However, only IR and steatosis were associated with IL28b rs12979860 CC after correcting for BMI and lipid profile, suggesting an indirect role of LDL-C status on IL28b polymorphism[58]. IR was found to have a predictive power for SVR which is independent of IL28 genotype[59], although the likelihood of achieving SVR progressively increases from the lowest probability in patients carrying both negative predictors (IR and rs12979860 TT/TC; SVR = 20.7%) to the highest probability in patients with no IR and rs12979860 CC (SVR = 78.4%)[58]. These data give rise once again to the thorny question concerning the intimate pathogenetic interplay between metabolic and genetic host factors.

Can pretreatment correction of the metabolic co-factor improve SVR to dual treatment?

One of the most intriguing and challenging tasks was to transfer the information regarding the predictive power of a metabolic variable for SVR to a practical ground. This gave rise to a series of studies aimed at improving SVR by correcting the metabolic factors before or during antiviral treatment.

Some studies with very small cohorts have explored the effect of a lifestyle intervention in obese and insulin-resistant subjects with chronic hepatitis C. BMI, HOMA values and leptin levels, but not TNF-α and IL-6, decreased significantly after aerobic exercise[60]. A more structured intervention based on 24-wk dietary and physical activity regimens significantly reduced BMI and HOMA values[61] and could be an interesting baseline strategy in difficult-to-treat chronic hepatitis C patients who are obese and insulin-resistant prior to starting peginterferon and ribavirin. However, to date, no studies have demonstrated the efficacy of this strategy. Tarantino et al[62] demonstrated that a low-calorie diet for 3 mo before starting antiviral therapy in patients with genotype 1-chronic hepatitis C resulted in a significant improvement in IR as well as a 60% “end-of-treatment” response rate in the low-calorie diet group as compared to the control group (17.6%).

More data have been reported on insulin sensitizing agents used in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin. The randomized, double-blind TRIC-1 trial by Romero-Gómez et al[63] analyzed 125 naive genotype 1 patients treated with peginterferon alpha-2a and ribavirin plus metformin or placebo on an intention-to-treat basis. Their final results showed that there was a significant decrease in both HOMA value and viral load during the first 12 wk, as well as an improvement in SVR rate in the metformin group as compared with the placebo group, but only in females[63]. While metformin failed to improve overall SVR, conflicting results have been obtained with other insulin sensitizing agents, mainly pioglitazone. Although comforting results have been obtained in genotype 4[64], no improvement in SVR was observed by adding pioglitazone (30 mg/d) to peginterferon and ribavirin as compared with the standard of care of dual therapy[65,66]. Similar negative results have been shown by Harrison et al[67] in a randomized controlled trial which compared pioglitazone plus standard of care vs standard of care alone. This study definitively demonstrated that even when pioglitazone was administered at an appropriate dose (45 mg/d), it failed to improve SVR, regardless of administration timing (i.e., prior to starting the standard of care or during the peginterferon and ribavirin course)[67].

ADVENT OF DIRECT ANTIVIRAL AGENTS AND THE NEW SCENARIO

In recent years, several antiviral drugs that directly target HCV have been developed. These new drugs, known as direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), are designed to interfere directly with the HCV life cycle by inhibiting enzymes such as HCV NS3/4A protease and HCV NS5B polymerase, or other proteins such as NS5A. Two NS3/4A protease inhibitors, boceprevir and telaprevir, have become the first new drugs approved for the treatment of patients with genotype 1 HCV who have either not previously received treatment or who failed to achieve SVR with previous therapy[68]. These new drugs, however, must be given with peginterferon and ribavirin because of their low barrier to viral resistance when they are used as monotherapy, and this may limit efficacy. A further limitation is due to overall side effects resulting in higher discontinuation rates. However, when candidates for this treatment are carefully selected, the overall SVR rates can almost double in naïve and even triple in relapsers to previous double therapy[69-75]. Thus, triple therapy is the new standard treatment for HCV genotype 1 chronic liver disease.

One of the questions under debate is whether the predictors of treatment failure that are observed when using dual therapy in HCV genotype 1 also exert a negative influence in triple therapy.

What we know about metabolic factors and triple therapy

Among the variables which have shown predictive power for SVR in dual therapy, some of them, such as IL28b polymorphism, fibrosis and the 4-wk viral response in both naive or previously treated patients, have also been highlighted in triple therapy on the basis of data emerging from registrative trials. Metabolic factors seem to play either no role at all, or only a minor one in influencing SVR in the context of triple treatment. However, some considerations have to be made when looking carefully at the post-hoc analysis of landmark phase-III trials.

In the boceprevir-based SPRINT-2 trial, two metabolic variables were associated with SVR, but only statin use proved to be an independent predictor of SVR (OR = 3.4; 95%CI: 1.1-10.7; P = 0.04), whereas BMI was not retained in the multivariate model after adjustment for other variables[72].

In RESPOND-2, a boceprevir-based trial focusing on previously treated patients, both the response-guided treatment (RGT) group and the 48-wk triple treatment group had a significantly higher SVR rate compared with dual treatment. However, in obese patients (BMI ≥ 30), a 10% lower SVR rate was observed in the RGT group compared with the 48-wk triple treatment group (56% vs 65%)[73].

A sub-analysis of baseline predictors in the SPRINT-2 and RESPOND-2 trials showed that a BMI ≤ 30 was significantly associated with SVR and with a ≥ 1 log10 HCV-RNA decline at week 4 in untreated patients but not in patients previously treated with peginterferon and ribavirin[76].

In the two telaprevir-based studies carried out on untreated patients, both ADVANCE[77] and ILLUMINATE[75] showed a higher SVR rate in the RGT arms compared with the double treatment arm, regardless of diabetes and obesity. In the ADVANCE study, although a 30% greater improvement in the SVR rate of patients receiving telaprevir for 12 wk was achieved in all 3 BMI groups (< 25, 25-30 and > 30) as compared to the control group, a 12%-16% lower SVR rate was observed in overweight and obese patients compared to normal weight patients.

An important contribution was provided by Serfaty et al[78] in their post-hoc analysis of the phase II C208 clinical trial[79]. In this study, which is the first to focus on the influence of baseline metabolic variables on SVR in patients treated with triple therapy, only LDL-C was associated with SVR (even in multivariate analysis), thus confirming its predictive role for SVR even in the telaprevir-based triple regimen and not only in dual therapy. However, this is not the case for baseline IR measured by the HOMA index, which did not show any relationship with SVR. Furthermore, the HOMA index did not influence the 4-wk HCV RNA decline, nor were the rates of HCV RNA undetectability at week 4 found to differ among patients with or without IR. However, this is not surprising since baseline HOMA values were not found to be associated with SVR in many European studies in which the study population had a low prevalence of advanced fibrosis and a relatively low BMI[39,40,80,81]. This may suggest that a higher prevalence of “viral” IR, which can easily be counteracted by antivirals, actually does exist in this population of patients. The significant association between HCV RNA and HOMA values in the study of Serfaty et al[78], as well as the improvement of HOMA in patients who achieved SVR compared with those who did not, further confirm the direct “in vivo” involvement of HCV in IR pathways. On the other hand, a powerful, combined effect on suppressing HCV viremia and rapidly lowering IR was previously observed using a 14-d course of danoprevir monotherapy, i.e., another powerful, selective inhibitor of NS3/4A HCV serine protease. Interestingly, overweight patients had a greater decrease in HOMA values than patients with normal BMI, despite a similar decrease in serum HCV RNA, suggesting a complex interplay between these two variables. The authors hypothesize an anti-inflammatory or insulin sensitizing effect of danoprevir[82].

Other important data concerning IR were obtained from a post-hoc analysis of the REALIZE phase III study which was carried out to assess the impact of IR on virological response to a telaprevir-based regimen in previously treated patients. Baseline HOMA values were found to be associated with SVR at univariate analysis (TVR: OR = 0.76; 95%CI: 0.60-0.96) but not after adjustment for other baseline prognostic factors (TVR: OR = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.71-1.29)[83]. SVR decreased as HOMA values increased, both in the control group and in the pooled T12-PR48 group where, however, this trend was observed only in prior partial and null responders, but not in prior relapsers.

In summary, on the basis of all these data we can say that LDL-C and statin use proved to be predictors of SVR in telaprevir and boceprevir-treated patients, respectively. Obesity may negatively influence rapid virologic decline as well as SVR in previously naive patients treated with a boceprevir-based regimen. To the best of our knowledge, no sub-analysis regarding the impact of obesity on SVR has ever been carried out for telaprevir. No data on HOMA are available for boceprevir. HOMA values were reported as being univariately associated with SVR in a telaprevir-based trial on previously treated patients. In naive patients treated with a telaprevir-based regimen, the HOMA value was not a predictor of SVR, nor was it found to be associated with rapid virological response.

However, some comments have to be made. First, we have no data on the real weight of baseline metabolic factors in patients with less favorable probability of response, such as those with advanced fibrosis and/or non-CC IL28b. It is reasonable to suppose that in patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis, as well as in prior partial or null responders to dual therapy and in whom non-CC IL28b is highly prevalent, metabolic IR, metabolic syndrome and obesity may be significant cofactors of nonresponse to triple therapy. Hopefully, this will be an issue for further studies. Secondly, in a real world setting we have to face a change in the epidemiology of candidates to triple therapy compared with the “world of trials”. In the “real world scenario” we have to expect a higher prevalence of patients over 65 years of age who have often previously been treated with dual therapy and have a higher prevalence of comorbidities, including hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes. In this context, many patients might experience either a worsening in the sensitivity to interferon as well as a higher probability of side effects when a protease-inhibitor is added to therapy.

These points seem to have been taken into consideration by United Kingdom consensus guidelines for the use of protease inhibitors in the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infected patients. These guidelines recommend evaluating the presence of factors predictive of poor response to therapy, such as BMI and type 2 diabetes among others[84].

Currently, an enormous effort is being made by researchers and companies to provide physicians with new and more powerful drugs with a high genetic barrier and able to work on several HCV genotypes. Recently, phase II and III studies on sofosbuvir, a new nucleotide analogue HCV NS5B polymerase inhibitor used in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin in genotypes 1, 4, 5 and 6 or in combination with ribavirin in genotypes 2 and 3, showed a high rate of SVR, up to 90% in untreated genotype 1 patients after a 12-wk regimen, with no additional side effects to those occurring with peginterferon and ribavirin[85-87].

New combinations of drugs with interferon-free schedules are under evaluation in phase II or III studies[88-91]. Hopefully, by the end of the decade the holy grail of a pangenotypic oral association of highly powerful drugs will be able to cure virtually all patients. In this scenario, the role of predictors of SVR will rapidly fade, but we have to keep in mind that in the short amount of time that separates us from the availability of new and more powerful treatment schedules, many patients will have to be treated with boceprevir and telaprevir-based triple therapy. Furthermore, many patients around the world have no, or only limited access to DAAs. With this in mind, SVR predictors remain important tools that are available to us in order to assign patients to the best treatment schedules.

CONCLUSION

Baseline metabolic factors seem to have a minor, though likely not negligible, role in influencing antiviral response to direct antiviral agent-based treatment in patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C. Further studies aimed at clarifying their role in a subpopulation of unfavorable candidates to this treatment, such as patients with advanced fibrosis or prior partial or null responders to peginterferon and ribavirin, are needed.

Footnotes

P- Reviewer: Pavlidis C S- Editor: Song XX L- Editor: O’Neill M E- Editor: Ma S

REFERENCES

Source