May 18, 2013

New HCV Drugs presented at EASL 2013, Reported by NATAP

Provided by NATAP

EASL NEW Oral HCV Drugs - Report 1 of 3

Reported by Jules Levin

Original reported filed April 26 from EASL in real-time live. Yesterday Abbvie reported results from a phase 2b study of their oral IFN-free 4-drug regimen with 99% SVR rate with 12 weeks therapy in genotype 1 and 98% SVR with 24 weeks in null responders, see the table in this email of the results & click the link to read the entire slide presentation. Abbvie is in phase 3 with this regimen. In the Late Breaker poster session SVR12 results were reported from the QUEST-1 phase 3 study looking at the Janssen once-daily new protease TMC435+Peg/Rbv in treatment-naive patients, with phase 3 QUEST-2 being reported tomorrow at EASL, with an overal SVR12 rate of 80%, with 80% of patients achieving a RVR, rapid viral response (undetectable at week 4) & with 91% of these patients thus being able to shorten therapy to 24 weeks & achieve SVR. TMC435 is being studied in numerous IFN-free studies that contain 2 orals without IFN. Also in the same oral session Gilead reported results from phase 3 the Fusion & Fission studies which were published wednesday in the New England Jnl of Medicine & below are links to this publication & the pdfs with a breakout of the data & links to the slides presented yesterday, with 12 weeks therapy achieving a 98% SVR rate with GS7977+Rbv in genotype 2 non-cirrhotic patients & 91% in cirrhotic patients in the phase 3 FISSION Study. For genotype 3 61% of noncirrhotics & 34% of cirrhotics achieving SVR, so gt3 did not achieve good results, a different strategy will be studied for gt3 by Gilead & others. Then in the phase 3 FUSION Study 12 vs 16 weeks GS7977+Rbv was explored, with 96% SVR for gt2 noncirrhotics with 12 weeks therapy & 100% with 16 weeks. For gt2 cirrhotics 78% SVR was achieved with 16 weeks GS7977+Rbv therapy and 60% with 12 weeks. Again for GT3 SVR rates were less with 16 weeks performing much better than 12 weeks: 63% vs 37% in noncirrhotics & 61% vs 19% in cirrhotics. Again a better treatment strategy for GT3 will be examined by Gilead & others, but clearly gt2 patients achieved great results. Here are links to key data reported Thursday in the first HCV oral session on new HCV drugs. A poster Late Breaker was reported yesterday showing SVR results with the BMS 3-oral drug IFN/-Rbv free regimen including their protease Asunaprevir+the NS5A BMS052 (declatavir)+ their non-nuc polymerase inhibitor BMS325 showing high SVR rates of 94% perhaps higher because of lost to followup, see the data & link below. There are 2 additional Late Breaker posters from Thursday not are not reported here in my original reported I filed & distributed in real time at EASL as it was too late & I was too tired last night to write the reports but I did them & one is on the BMS protease BMS032 Asunaprenavir + PegRBv. This is a phase 2b study with patients receiving 200mg bid + Peg/Rbv for 24 weeks. The other was a poster from BMS on their development of a new "synergy" NS5A "molecule" that would be administered along with BMS052 & intended to prevent NS5A resistance. Both Janssen & Gilead have just recently submitted New Drug Applications to the FDA for indications for the use of GS7977 and for TMC435 with approvals expected by the end of the year. Other companies are completing phase 3 now & will be submitting NDAs to the FDA soon. Many additional studies are ongoing with these drugs in various types of IFN & Rbv free regimens with 2 or 3 oral HCV drugs., by all the companies, so as we move forward over the next few years the regimens will improve, will become more potent, efficient & effective. Gilead's coformulated combination of GS7977+ their NS5A GS5885 is in phase 3 now with an expected NDA application to the FDA in 2014. At CROI in April Janseen reported 96% SVR rates with the combination of TMC435+GS7977+Rbv for 12 weeks & 93% without Rbv in the COSMOS Study in null responders. BMS has reported 100% SVR rates with with their NS5A BMS052, now in phase 3, + GS7977 in treatment naives without Rbv & are reporting data here in telaprevir/boceprevir failures showing an expected 100% SVR rate. Of note, at EASL Gilead reported from the QUANTUM Study that patients who did not achieve an SVR with GS7977 were retreated & 76% achieved SVR.

Continue to full article here …..


New HCV Drugs: Report 2

Reported by Jules Levin
EASL 48th Annual Meeting
April 24th - 28th 2013
The Netherlands, Amsterdam

This report is an updated version that was originally distributed live in real-time from EASL on April 28. 2 days ago I reported & distributed by email "New HCV Drugs - report 1" which was a report from the first 2 days on new study data reported for new HCV drugs, this report is a followup on new study data reported for new HCV drugs in the last 2 days of the conference EASL. There are many more reports to be prepared from this conference coming. Daclatasvir, TMC435, Faldaprevir & MK5172 reports below are from studies in combination with Peg/Rbv, but IFN-free all oral combination studies with 2 or perhaps 3 orals are also being studied, one study is reported below: Daclatasvir+GS7977 in 41 patients who previously were treated with boceprevir or telaprevir & did not achieve SVR, this is the first study treating patients who did not achieve SVR when treated previously with a protease triple therapy. Yesterday from 3:30 to 5:30pm, was the oral Late-Breaker session here at EASL in Amsterdam, the city of canals & lots of people using bikes to get around this relatively small but very cosmopolitan urban and yet still old European-style city of 850,000 people, that has a very nice bustling downtown with squares & lots of shopping, clothing stores and walking malls. Presented in the Late Breaker session was (see links below to the study data reports.

- GS7977(nucleotide)+Peg/Rbv for 12 weeks for genotypes 1/4/5/6 in the phase 3 NEUTRINO Study
- TMC435 (protease)+Peg/Rbv for GT1 in the phase 3 QUEST-2 Study
- Faldaprevir (BI335, protease)+Peg/Rbv in the phase 3 study STARTVERS01
- NS5A BMS052+GS7977 in GT1 patients who previously did not achieve an SVR with boceprevir or telaprevir (this captured a lot of attention)
- Daclatasvir (BMS052) + Peg/Rbv for GT2/3 for 12 or 16 weeks

The day before a phase 2 study on MK5172 (Merck 2nd generation protease) + Peg/Rbv for Gt1 was presented.

In the NEUTRINO Study with GS7977+Rbv taken for 12 weeks the overall SVR rate was 90%, there were 327 patients in this study, mostly Gt1 with 89% SVR rate in Gt1, 96% in Gt4, and 100% for Gt5/6. The overall SVR for non-cirrhotics was 92% & 80% for cirrhotics. Regarding resistance they looked at 28 patients who relapsed & 1 patient who discontinued treatment with HCV RNA>1000 IU/Ml and they reported "no S282T mutations, the signatory GS7977 mutation, observed by population or deep sequencing (1%) cutoff, no change in susceptibility to GS7977 or Rbv observed by phenotype amnalyses of other NS5B substitutions". There was a poster here on the QUANTUM Study, I distributed by email yesterday, wherein they retreated 132 patients who had not achieved SVR who were previously treated with GS938 (the discontinued sister drug of GS7977) or GS7977+GS938 and they reported high SVR rates of 76-85%, the point being it is hard to get resistance to GS7977. See link to study below. Gilead has submitted an initial New Drug Application to the FDA for approval of GS7977+Rbv for GT2/3 and for GS7977+Peg/Rbv for Gt1 and I think additional GTs 4....And here at EASL they reported phase 3 results in GT2/3:

EASL: All Oral Therapy With Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin for 12 or 16 Weeks in Treatment-Experienced Genotype 2/3 HCV-Infected Patients: Results of the Phase 3 FUSION Trial - (04/25/13)

EASL: Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial of All-Oral Treatment With Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin for 12 Weeks Compared to 24 Weeks of PEG + Ribavirin in Treatment-Naïve GT 2/3 HCV-Infected Patients (FISSION) - (04/25/13)

EASL: No S282T Mutation Detected by Deep Sequencing in a Large Number of HCV Patients Who Received Sofosbuvir With RBV and/or GS-0938: the Quantum Study - (04/29/13)

The phase 3 QUEST-2 Study reported on TMC435, the new once-daily HCV protease from Janssen, + Peg/Rbv, with an SVR12 rate of 81%, and 94% of patients were eligible for shortened 24 weeks therapy & among them 86% achieved SVR, see link below to the data report that includes the slide presentation, in the report is a slide with an interesting list of studies in the TMC435 development program, of note including numerous IFN-free multi-oral combination studies being conducted. Of note 88% achieved SVR with Pegasys while 77% achieved SVR with PegIntron, and of course this was noted with comments after the presentation with the presenter Michael Manns saying this was not a properly randomized study to address the question of which peg has superior efficacy, Pegasys & Pegintron. 96% IL28B CC achieved SVR, 80% with CT & 57% with TT. Of note SVR rates were the same for GT1a & GT1b: 80.4% & 82% respectively. SVR rate by stage of disease reflecting again that cirrhotics are harder to treat with lower SVR rates seen here & in other studies, thus needing more potent regimens & with null cirrhotics being the hardest to treat: 84.6% with early disease (F0-F2) achieved SVR, 66.7% with F3 & 64.7% with F4. There was some rash & photosensitivity associated with TMC435 but apparently manageable, 97% grade 1/2. and "mild, transient bilirubin increases not accompanied by changes in other liver parameters". Janssen has submitted to the FDA a New Drug Application for TMC435. A FDA hearing is scheduled for mid-October, perhaps to hear & review both the Gilead & Jansssen submissions simultaneously as they did 2 years ago for both telaprevir & boceprevir, apparently it is posted online that the FDA is holding hearings Oct 24 & 25. A 2nd phase 2 study QUEST-1 was presented here at EASL as well.

Faldaprevir is the new once-daily HCV protease from Boehringer Ingelheim, also called BI335. They reported SVR results from the phase 3 study STARTVERS01, they studied 2 doses 120 & 240 mg once daily + Peg/Rbv in over 600 patients, reporting overall SVR12 rates of 79% with the 120mg dose & 80% with the 240mg dose, with 88% achieving what they called ETS, early treatment success at week 4, permitting a shortened therapy of 24 weeks & of these patients 86% with 120mg & 89% with 240mg achieving SVR12. GT1a SVR12s were 69% with 120mg & 76% with 240mg & for Gt1b 84% with 120mg & 83% with 240mg. Boehringer is planning to submit to the FDA their NDA soon. See link below to slide presentation. Those with IL28b, 90% receiving 120mg & 95% receiving 240mg achieved SVR12, for CT 70% & 69% achieved SVR12, and for TT 76% & 79%. There was GI upset, rash & bilirubin increases. Of note several additional phase 3 studies are near completion including one in HCV/HIV coinfection and will be presented publicly later at a conference. BI reported at CROI ART HIV drug-drug interactions which generally are favorable and so they appear to be headed to be the first with a FDA indication for coinfection.

CROI: Pharmacokinetic interactions of darunavir/ritonavir, efavirenz, and tenofovir with the HCV protease inhibitor faldaprevir in healthy volunteers - (03/04/13)

CROI: STARTVerso 4: High rates of early virologic response in HCV genotype 1/HIV-co-infected patients treated with faldaprevir plus pegIFN and RBV - (03/04/13)

CROI: Boerhinger Ingelheim Announes Interim Results Evaluating Virologic Response Rates in HCV/HIV Coinfected Patients Treated with HCV Protease BI201335, and Drug Drug Interaction Studies with HIV ARTs - (03/04/13) press announcement

The first retreatment study of patients who failed (nonresponse, relapse, breakthrough) a triple therapy with either boceprevir or telaprevir with an IFN-free regimen was presented at yesterday's Late Breaker session & perhaps this garnered the most attention & discussion, although all the new data here on all the new oral HCV drugs captured everyone's delight & everyone was very pleased with the great progress in treating HCV. 21 patients received the BMS NS5A BMS052 (Daclatasvir) + GS7977 (Gilead's nucleotide) and 20 patients received this 2 drug combination along with Rbv, treatment was 24 weeks. Of note 81-85% had F2 disease stage or greater and Mark Sulkowski, who presented the data, said some of these patients may have had cirrhosis, the stages of disease by some of these patients varied based on when the test was done etc. At the end of treatment 100% HCV RNA < LLOQ, SVR4 was 100%, and SVR12 was 95%, there was 1 patient who was missing at post-treatment week 12, but "HCV RNA was undetectable at post-treatment week 4 & post-treatment week 24 (preliminary). 21/41 patients have reached PT week 24, all have achieved SVR24. see link below to full slide presentation. Side effects included headache, fatigue. By the way, in the presentation Sulkowski mentioned that it has been I think I recall he said as long as 1.5 or more years, perhaps as much as 2 yrs, since some patients had stopped boceprevir or telaprevir therapy & of note baseline resistance mutations were still detected, but apparently with 95-100% SVR rates, this resistance did not affect outcomes in this regimen with 2 orals from 2 different classes, but this raises a concern that protease resistance may not disappear as easily as has been reported previously in some studies, see the report link to read the slide on baseline mutations.

Results were reported in the Late Breaker session yesterday from the COMMAND GT2/3 Study where 150 patients with Gt2/3 were studied & 100 received the BMS NS5A Dacaltasvir (BMS052) + Peg/Rbv for either 12 or 16 weeks. In the 12 week arm at the End Of Treatment for GT2 100% had < LLOQ-TD (target detected, detectable but < LLOQ) and 96% had < LLOQ-TND (target not detected, undetectable), with 100% & 91% for the 16-week arm, and of note the 24-week Peg/Rbv-placebo arm had similar SVR rates of 96 & 91% (which changed in SVR rates). SVR24 for GT2 in the 12-week group was 88% < LLOQ-TD & 83% < LLOQ-TND, and for the 16 week arm 83% for both measures, they called this modified ITT analysis, so they also said in the graph legend SVR24 observed values (excluding patients with missing post-treatment data: 95% (DCV 12 weeks), 100% DCV 16 weeks). IL28b CC GT2 patients had 100% SVR with 16 weeks (7/7) byt CT & TT had lower SVR rates, see slide graph. Response rates were less for GT3 patients, SVR24 rates of 67-70% & 69-72% after excluding missing post-treatment data and SVR24 for Peg/Rbv-placebo arm was 59%, so clearly GT3 patients did not perform well here either as in the GS7977 study and need extra potency with therapy directed at GT3. For patients with PDR, protocol defined responses (HCV RNA < LLOQ at week 4 & < LLOQ-TND at week 10, SVR24 rates were 81% with 12 weeks for GT2 & 94% with 16 weeks for GT2 & for GT3 73% with 12 weeks or 16 weeks. See link below to the slides presented.

Merck's once-daily MK5172 is a 2nd generation protease with activity against resistant virus. In this study of 332 non-cirrhotic patients, several MK5172 doses were looked at: 100mg, 200mg, 400mg & 800mg, all once daily, + Peg/Rbv. Patients received 12 weeks of MK5172 and the comparison arm was boceprevir+Peg/Rbv. At AASLD in Nov 2012 SVR12 was reported & here SVR24 & HCV-RNA (TND) is reported with 311/332 (94%) patients have reached followup week 24 or have discontinued before week 24 followup. SVR24 & HCV-RNA TND* at last visit with 100mg (the dose to be used) +PR was 86% (55/64) & 92% (61/66), (*HCV RNA TND at last visit: patients who discontinued for reasons other than virologic failure, who completed therapy and are in follow-up, or who completed therapy but did not return for the followup week 24 visit). 91% of patients receiving MK5172 100mg had HCV-RNA TND at week 4 & were eligible for the short-duration of therapy and 98% had HCV-RNA TND at last visit & 90% had SVR 24. See link below to full slide report. Merck & BMS recently announced an agreement to study a 2 oral once-daily regimen IFN-free in genotype 1 with this protease MK5172 + the BMS NS5A BMS052.

Continue to full article here ….


HCV New Drugs - Report 3 (ELECTRON Study phase 2: GS7977+Rbv GT1)

Reported by Jules Levin

This report was also originally filed & distributed via the NATAP listserve live & real-time from EASL on Sunday the day EASL ended.

EASL: ELECTRON: All-Oral Sofosbuvir-Based 12-Week Regimens for the Treatment of Chronic HCV GT 1 Infection - (04/27/13)

Gilead Announces Update on Phase 3 Study of Oral Fixed-Dose Combination of Sofosbuvir and Ledipasvir for Genotype 1 Hepatitis C Patients - (04/01/13) Phase 3 ION-1 and ION-2 studies GS7977+GS5885 with & without Rbv in treatment-naives & patients who failed previous therapy with either Peg/Rbv or triple therapy with a protease+Peg/Rbv.

EASL: DATA FROM PHASE 3 STUDIES OF GILEAD'S SOFOSBUVIR FOR HEPATITIS C TO BE PRESENTED AT 48TH ANNUAL EASL MEETING; FINDINGS PUBLISHED ONLINE TODAY IN THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE - Press Release - (04/23/13)

EASL: Treatment With Sofosbuvir + Peginterferon + Ribavirin for 12 Weeks Achieves 90% SVR12 in Treatment-Naïve Genotype 1, 4, 5, and 6 HCV-Infected Patients: The NEUTRINO Study - (04/27/13)

EASL: Once-Daily Sofosbuvir Plus Ribavirin Given for 12 or 24 Weeks in Treatment-Naïve Patients With HCV Infection: the QUANTUM Study - (04/28/13)

I count I think 6 phase 3 studies for Gilead in HCV covering across the genotypes, take a look at the 2 links above listing the various phase 3 studies. The ELECTRON Study is a phase 2 of about 94 patients looking at both treatment-naives & null responders with each of 3 treatment arms for 12 weeks therapy: GS7977+Rbv, GS7977+GS5885 (NS5A)+Rbv and GS7977+GS9669 (non-nuc)+Rbv. These were 90% Gt1a patients without cirrhosis, phase 3 will include cirrhotics. You can view the ELECTRON slide presentation here at EASL with the link above. Here is the results slide just below showing 100% in naives (25/25) with the 3-drug regimen of GS7977+GS5885+Rbv & 100% in nulls with the same regimen, phase 3 ION studies will look at with & without Rbv with the coformulation of GS7977+GS5885. You can see this study also looked at GS7977+GS9669 (non-nuc)+Rbv with 92% SVR in naives (23/25) & 3/3 SVR in nulls all with 12 weeks, ION-2 will look at treatment-experienced with 12 and 24 weeks therapy.

Continue to full article here ….


New Oral HCV Drugs at EASL - Report 4A

Gilead Reports Interim Data From Phase 2 LONESTAR Study - (05/03/13)

Reported by Jules Levin

Results from many phase 2 & phase 3 studies of new oral HCV drugs were reported at EASL, which just took place in Amsterdam April 24-28. Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, & BMS all reported new data on their drugs. About 8-9 clinical/patient Gilead studies were reported at EASL with GS-7977 in Gt1 and Gt2/3, with therapy taken for as little as 12 weeks. ELECTRON & QUANTUM looked at Gt1 & both were phase 2 studies using GS-7977+rbv, but ongoing are ION phase 3 studies looking at the coformulated 2 oral regimen of GS7977+GS5885 with & without Rbv for 12 & 24 weeks including naives & treatment-experienced & those who failed to respond to triple therapy with a protease. You can read brief summaries of the results from the Gilead studies below & if you scroll down to the bottom of this report you will see links to the full slide & poster presentations. Abbott reported phase 2 results from their 4-drug IFN-free regimen taken for 12 weeks with 99% SVR in naives & 98% in nulls, see link below to read the slide presentation. Boehringer Ingelheim reported phase 3 results of their protease Faldaprevir (BI1335) from 1 study with 80% SVR rates, in combination with Peg/Rbv, several additional phase 3 studies including the coinfection study will be presented later this year. Janssen reported SVR rates of 81% from their 2 QUEST phase 3 studies, links below. BMS reported phase 2 results on their 3 drug IFN/RBV free all oral regimen given for 12 or 24 weeks with 90-94% SVR rates, they are planning a larger phase 3 study, see link below to read full poster. Merck reported phase 2 data with their 2nd generation protease MK5172+Peg/Rbv with 92% SVR rate, they just announced a deal with BMS for a study of the IFN-free regimen of MK5172 plus the BMS NS5A BMS052, plus they have further back in development a study with MK5172 plus their 2nd generation NS5A MK8742. Janssen & Boehringer are planning IFN-free studies looking at combinations of new oral drugs. Boehringer is looking at their protease in combination with their non-nuc BI127 plus the Presidio NS5A, recently announced. Janssen is involved in multiple oral regimen studies including one with their own non-nuc TMC055+the protease TMC435, another one with TMC435+TMC055+IDX719, TMC435+IDX719, one with TMC435+BMS052, & with TMC435 & Vertex in combination with their nucleotide VX135. Vertex is conducting numerous studies with their nucleotide VX135 in combinations with various oral HCV drugs from other companies, see links below to VX135 studies presented at EASL including with GSK NS5A GSK805. BMS just announced a study of their NS5A BMS052 in combination with VX135. Roche, don't forget Roche, they have ongoing, started last spring 2012, a 4-drug oral regimen, IFN-free- called ANNAPURNA, link to information below. Achillion has a protease, a 2nd generation NS5A & a 2nd generation protease in early development & Idenix has their NS5A & a nucleotide program in preclinical with studies perhaps to start with a nucleotide later this year. Presidio has a pangenotypic non-nuc & a NS5A, links below. Gilead submitted a New Drug Application for GS-7977 for 2 indications including for GS7977+Peg/rbv for Gt1, they are expected to be submitting a NDA next year for the coformulation of GS7977+GS5885. Janssen submitted their NDA TMC435. An FDA hearing for both drugs is expected in October this year. Boehringer is expected to an NDA submit to the FDA including for coinfection. As well, BMS will file a NDA including for BMS052, their NS5A. Abbott started their phase 3 program for their 4-drug IFN-free regimen in the Fall of 2012.

Genotype 1:

Treatment With Sofosbuvir + Peginterferon + Ribavirin for 12 Weeks Achieves 90% SVR12 in Treatment-Naïve Genotype 1, 4, 5, and 6 HCV-Infected Patients: The NEUTRINO Study....relapse accounted for all failures....no resistance (deep sequencing) was seen among relapsers

327 total patients (genotypes 1, 4, 5, 6) were treated with GS-7977+Peg/Ribavirin for 12 weeks in the phase 3 NEUTRINO Study, results reported at EASL. 292 patients with GT1 received GS-7977+Peg/Rbv for 12 weeks with 89% achieving SVR12. For GT4, 96% (27/28) patients achieved SVR12. And 100% (7/7) with genotypes 5/6 achieved SVR. Overall, 92% without cirrhosis achieved SVR12 & 80% without cirrhosis achieved SVR12. Among the 28 patients who relapsed & the 1 patient who discontinued with HCV RNA viral load >1000 no S282T mutation was observed, this is the signature mutation for GS-7977, and no change in susceptibility by phenotypic analyses of other NS5B substitutions was observed. Side effects reported appeared to be mostly related to ribavirin with 21% anemia.

phase 2: ELECTRON: All-Oral Sofosbuvir-Based 12-Week Regimens for the Treatment of Chronic HCV GT 1 Infection

GS-7977+Rbv was taken for 12 weeks in this small phase 2 study of genotype 1 patients, 25 treatment-naives & 10 null responders with 84% of the naives achieving SVR12 & only 10% of the nulls achieving SVR. But GS-7977+GS5885 (once daily NS5A) + Rbv was given to 25 naives with 100% SVR & 9 nulls with 100% SVR, and the large ION-1 & ION-2 ongoing phase 3 studies are looking at these regimens & will provide more results. This study also looked at the Gilead non nuc Gs-9669+GS7977+Rbv for 12 weeks duration of therapy and 23/25, 92%, of naives & 3/3 nulls achieved SVR12.

Genotype 2/3:

Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial of All-Oral Treatment With Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin for 12 Weeks Compared to 24 Weeks of PEG + Ribavirin in Treatment-Naïve GT 2/3 HCV-Infected Patients (FISSION)

This study of 500 treatment-naive genotype 2/3 patients compared 12 weeks GS-7977+Rbv to 24 weeks of Peg/RBV. After 12 weeks of GS-7977+Rbv 99% had undetectable viral load but SVR12 was 67%. For those receiving 24 weeks Peg/Rbv 99% had undetectable viral load after 24 weeks but 67% SVR12. Certainly GS-7977+Rbv is more tolerable & safe than Peg/Rbv. For those genotype 2 patients receiving GS7977+Rbv for 12 weeks 92% had SVR12 but only 56% Gt3 had SVR12. For Gt2 patients taking Peg/rbv for 24 weeks 78% achieved SVR12 but 63% with Gt3 achieved SVR12. For Gt2 patients receiving GS7977+Rbv both cirrhotics & non-cirrhotics did well, there was not much of a difference in SVR rate with 98% of non-cirrhotics & 91% of cirrhotics achieving SVR12. But fot Gt3 patients the degree of liver disease affected outcomes with 61% without cirrhosis achieving SVR12 vs 34% with cirrhosis. There were no unusual side effects reported, SOF+Rbv was well tolerated, safety profile consistent with Rbv.

All Oral Therapy With Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin for 12 or 16 Weeks in Treatment-Experienced Genotype 2/3 HCV-Infected Patients: Results of the Phase 3

FUSION Trial

This study of about 200 patients compared 12 vs 16 weeks of GS-7977+Rbv for treatment-experienced patients (Peg/Rbv). 30% of study subjects had cirrhosis, 70% were non-CC IL28b. At the end of treatment in both groups 100% had undetectable SVR, all patients finished treatment, relapse accounted for all failures. SVR12 was 50% for 12 weeks & 73% for 16 weeks. The difference in response between GT2 & Gt3 reflected results: for Gt2 patients, 86% receiving 12 weeks & 94% receiving 16 weeks achieved SVR12 while for Gt3 patients 30% receiving 12 weeks & 62% receiving 16 weeks achieved SVR. And the presence of cirrhosis affected outcomes. Gt2 patients without cirrhosis had 96% with 12 weeks & 100% with 16 weeks SVR12, but for cirrhotics 60% (6/10) with 12 weeks & 78% (7/9) with 16 weeks achieved SVR12. For Gt3 without cirrhosis 37% with 12 weeks & 63% with 16 weeks achieved SVR12 & for those with cirrhosis 19% with 12 weeks (5/26) & 61% with 16 weeks achieved SVR12. Again resistance to GS7977 was not an issue and there were no unusual side effects.

Treatment With Sofosbuvir + Ribavirin for 12 Weeks Achieves SVR12 of 78% in GT 2/3 Interferon-Ineligible, -Intolerant, or -Unwilling Patients: Results of the Phase 3 POSITRON Trial

207 patients received GS-7977+rbv. SVR was 93% for Gt2 & 61% for Gt3. Relapse accounted for all failures, no resistance seen in any relapse patient, and Gs-7977+Rbv was well tolerated. At the end of treatment 100% of patients had undetectable viral load & SVR12 was 78% with 92% for Gt2 & 61% for Gt3. Gt2 patients with or without cirrhosis did well, cirrhosis did not affect their outcomes with both groups achieving the same SVR, but cirrhosis did affect outcomes for Gt3 with 68% without cirrhosis achieving SVR12 % 21% with only cirrhosis achieving SVR12. Side affects were again consistent with those expected from Rbv.

Ongoing phase 3 studies ION-1 & ION-2 with coformulated once-daily GS7977+GS5885 :

ION-1, a Phase 3 clinical trial evaluating a once-daily fixed-dose combination of the nucleotide sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir with and without ribavirin (RBV) for 12 or 24 weeks among treatment-naïve genotype 1 patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection (n=800)

ION-2 initiated in January 2013, which is now fully enrolled. ION-2 is evaluating sofosbuvir/ledipasvir with RBV for 12 weeks, and with and without RBV for 24 weeks, among 400 treatment-experienced genotype 1 HCV patients. Participants in this study failed to respond to past therapy containing pegylated interferon (peg-IFN) or peg-IFN plus a protease inhibitor.

EASL: DATA FROM PHASE 3 STUDIES OF GILEAD'S SOFOSBUVIR FOR HEPATITIS C TO BE PRESENTED AT 48TH ANNUAL EASL MEETING; FINDINGS PUBLISHED ONLINE TODAY IN THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE - Press Release - (04/23/13)

Amsterdam, The Netherlands, April 23, 2013 - Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Nasdaq: GILD) today announced that detailed results from four Phase 3 clinical trials (NEUTRINO, FISSION, POSITRON and FUSION) evaluating sofosbuvir, the company's investigational once-daily nucleotide NS5B inhibitor for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, will be presented this week in oral sessions at the 48th Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of the Liver (International Liver Congress 2013) in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. In addition, detailed results from the four clinical studies have also been published online in two papers, ahead of print, in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).

In the four trials, sofosbuvir was administered to nearly 1,000 patients with chronic HCV infection as part of an all-oral 12-week or 16-week treatment regimen in combination with ribavirin (RBV) in genotypes 2 and 3, or with RBV and pegylated interferon (peg-IFN) for 12 weeks in genotypes 1, 4, 5 and 6. Overall SVR12 rates (sustained viral response 12 weeks after completing therapy) from 50 to 90 percent were observed. Patients who achieve SVR12 are considered cured of their HCV infection.

A description of the four Phase 3 studies and SVR12 results are summarized in the table below. Detailed results from the Phase 3 studies of sofosbuvir are available at www.nejm.org/online-first., you can read the published articles on the 4 studies with links to them below, scroll down.

SofoPhase3

Continue to full article here ….


To read further reports and view posters please visit NATAP for full EASL 2013 coverage

Triple Therapy for Hepatitis C is Effective After Liver Transplantation, but Side-Effects Are Common

Provided by CDCNPIN

Abstract

Researchers, including Elizabeth Verna of Columbia University and others from the Consortium to Study Health Outcomes in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Liver Transplant Recipients (CRUSH-C) study evaluated triple therapy in liver transplant recipients at six US centers. The researchers reported on their study results at the 48th International Liver Congress in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, on April 24–28, 2013. The research included 112 patients with HCV genotype 1 (55 percent with harder-to-treat subtype 1a). Of these, 80 percent were men, the majority were white, their median age was 58 years, and 26 percent had the favorable IL28B CC gene variant. Half of the patients had been treated previously with interferon-based therapy post-transplant, 25 percent were relapsers, 27 percent were partial responders, and 48 percent were null responders. Most had moderate-to severe fibrosis and all participants were being treated with immunosuppressive drugs to prevent organ rejection. Triple therapy for HCV consisted of pegylated interferon, ribavirin, and either telaprevir or boceprevir. Median time from liver transplantation to the start of therapy was 3.7 years. At week 4 of treatment, 66 percent of patients had undetectable HCV RNA, which increased to 84 percent of patients at week 12. Altogether, 64 percent of patients had extended rapid virological response (eRVR). Of the 43 patients who completed therapy with at least 4 weeks of post treatment follow-up, 65 percent achieved sustained virological response (SVR) 4. Among those with eRVR, the SVR4 rate rose to 93 percent of patients. For patients with advanced disease, 44 percent achieved SVR4 compared with 71 percent without advanced disease. Adverse events were common and 11 percent discontinued treatment. One in five experienced serious adverse events requiring hospitalization, 4 percent experienced liver graft rejection, and 6 percent died during follow-up. The researchers concluded that high eRVR rates can be achieved with triple therapy, exceeding previous rates with pegylated interferon/ribavirin alone, even with hard-to-treat patients. They acknowledged that SVR4 rates may be lower in patients with advanced disease, and that the results must be balanced against high rates of adverse events. They also noted that improving tolerability and identifying predictors of SVR are critical to optimizing the risks-benefits of post liver transplant triple therapy. The full report, “ A Multicenter Study of Protease Inhibitor-Triple Therapy in HCV-Infected Liver Transplant Recipients; Report from the CRUSH-C Group,” was published online in the Journal of Hepatology (2013; doi:10.1016/S0168-8278(13)60025-2).

Source

http://www.aidsmap.com

Date of Publication 05/16/2013

Author Liz Highleyman

Disclaimer: NPIN provides this information as a public service only. The views and information provided about the materials, funding opportunities, and organizations do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, or NPIN.

Source

Coffee Consumption Associated with Reduced Risk of Autoimmunue Liver Disease

A Range of New Research Studies Presented at DDW® 2013

Orlando, FL (May 18, 2013) — Research presented today at Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) explores new discoveries in liver disease research, with findings about the impact of coffee on autoimmune disease and palliative care for cirrhotic patients.

While coffee consumption recently has been associated with reduced risk of fibrosis, a new study found that even a few more cups of java each month also correlate with lower risk for a particular autoimmune liver disease. Researchers at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, linked coffee consumption with reduced risk of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), a disease of the bile ducts that causes inflammation and subsequent duct obstruction that ultimately can lead to cirrhosis of the liver, liver failure and biliary cancer.

“While rare, PSC has extremely detrimental effects,” said Craig Lammert, MD, instructor of medicine at Mayo Clinic. “We are always looking for ways to mitigate risk, and our first-time finding points to a novel environmental effect that might also help us to determine the cause of this and other devastating autoimmune diseases.”

Funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the American Liver Foundation, the study examined the largest cohort of patients with PSC and primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) in the U.S. as well as a healthy control group. Data showed that coffee consumption was associated with reduced risk of PSC, but not PBC. PSC patients were much more likely to never consume coffee compared with the control group. The control group also spent nearly 20 percent more of their life regularly drinking coffee.

Study highlights need of terminally ill cirrhotic patients

Other DDW research illuminates the need for better palliative care for terminally ill cirrhotic patients who are rejected for a liver transplant. A retrospective cohort review of patients previously assessed or listed for liver transplant by the University of Alberta in Canada found that only 3 percent of patients in the study died while in hospice, a hallmark of palliative care.

“In our study, less than 10 percent of patients had even been referred to palliative care,” said Constantine Karvellas, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Alberta. “We need to be better about ensuring quality of life for these patients.”

Palliative care is specialized medical care for people with serious, often terminal, illnesses. Its goal is to improve patients’ quality of life by concentrating on relief from symptoms, pain and stress.

The patients in Dr. Karvellas’s study had been de-listed or declined for liver transplantation. The most common reason was noncompliance with restrictions on substance use, but other reasons related to cancer and multiple organ dysfunction. Researchers examined patients’ medical trajectory and the symptoms prominent at their end of life and found that more than half had pain and nausea. Others had symptoms of depression, anxiety, breathlessness and anorexia. Eighty percent required repeat hospital admissions and invasive procedures such as paracentesis, in which fluid accumulation is drained from the abdomen.

“Palliative care offers a way to avoid some of these costly procedures and at the same time improve the quality of life for these patients. This data helps to start the conversation on how we can make a positive difference in the lives of many patients and families,” Dr. Karvellas said.

Dr. Lammert will present data from the study “Coffee consumption is associated with reduced risk of primary sclerosing cholangitis but not primary biliary cirrhosis,” abstract 630, on Monday, May 20, at 10 a.m. ET in Room 205A of the Orange County Convention Center.

Dr. Karvellas will present data from the study “Paucity of palliation in cirrhotic patients: a retrospective study and needs assessment,” abstract 796, on Monday, May 20, at 4:30 p.m. ET in Room 202AB of the Orange County Convention Center.

# # #

Digestive Disease Week® (DDW) is the largest international gathering of physicians, researchers and academics in the fields of gastroenterology, hepatology, endoscopy and gastrointestinal surgery. Jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT), DDW takes place May 18 to 21, 2013, at the Orange County Convention Center, Orlando, FL. The meeting showcases more than 5,000 abstracts and hundreds of lectures on the latest advances in GI research, medicine and technology. More information can be found at www.ddw.org.

Follow us on Twitter @DDWMeeting; hashtag #DDW13. Become a fan of DDW on Facebook.

Source

May 17, 2013

Hepatitis C in the United States Perspective (screening/care)

Provided by NATAP

Download the PDF here

Scott D. Holmberg, M.D., M.P.H., Philip R. Spradling, M.D., Anne C. Moorman, M.P.H., and Maxine M. Denniston, M.S.P.H. From the Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Division of Viral Hepatitis, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.

N Engl J Med May 16 2013

Care for hepatitis C is evolving rapidly, with increasingly effective and better-tolerated antiviral therapies being evaluated and approved for use. It's clear, however, that not everyone who would qualify for therapy has been tested and identified, referred for appropriate care, and offered or given the best therapy available. Furthermore, currently used antiviral drugs - pegylated interferon and ribavirin "base" plus either telaprevir or boceprevir - can cost more than $70,000 for a full course of therapy. It is expected that the new oral antiviral agents will be just as expensive, at least in the short term. All these factors affect personal, medical, public health, and national policy decisions. One fundamental problem in making such decisions is that it's difficult to estimate the number of people with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the United States who have been identified and have received appropriate care.

Over the past 4 years, members of the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have executed and analyzed two large studies of hepatitis C in the United States. Researchers conducting the Chronic Hepatitis Cohort Study (CHeCS) are currently examining records from more than 13,000 patients with hepatitis C (and more than 3500 with hepatitis B) who have been seen at four health care organizations in the United States (in Detroit, Michigan; Danville, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; and Honolulu, Hawaii) since 2006. These patients are drawn from a population of about 1.6 million adults who have received care at these four sites during the approximately 6 years for which retrospective and prospective analysis has been under way.1,2 The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) takes a different approach: random sampling of approximately 5000 noninstitutionalized U.S. civilians per year, using standardized household interviews, physical examinations, and testing of serum samples.3 Details and results of these two studies give a consistent picture of the status of HCV infection in the United States (see flow chart).

An examination of the prevalence of chronic HCV infection in the United States during the period 1999 through 2002, based on NHANES data and factoring in persons who were institutionalized, incarcerated, or homeless, suggested that there were about 3.5 million HCV-infected U.S. residents.4 According to an as-yet-unpublished study by Denniston et al., a more recent prevalence estimate based on NHANES data from 2003 through 2010 reveals the effect of increasing mortality on this population. These analyses indicate that a reasonable estimate of the current number of infected people in the United States is about 3.2 million.

The CHeCS investigators examined 1.2 million people who used the four integrated medical care systems during 2006 through 2008, and 57% of the number estimated to have HCV infection had actually been tested and identified as infected. In the broader population from which the 30,140 NHANES participants were drawn, 50% of persons who had tested positive for antibodies to HCV and provided information during in-depth telephone interviews were aware of their HCV-infection status before being notified of that infection by the NHANES.3 The CHeCS researchers are currently examining reasons why the people who were found to be infected in their study had or had not been tested previously. In the population on which the CHeCS draws, less than half of people who had had two or more abnormal alanine aminotransferase results were subsequently tested for HCV infection.2

As an indication of access to care, of the first 8810 CHeCS patients - who are receiving care at integrated health care organizations - 62% had private insurance, 35% had public insurance (Medicare or Medicaid), and 3% had none.1 In the NHANES, 128 of 170 HCV-infected people who responded to follow-up surveys (75%) said they had health insurance,3 but the type of insurance was not included in the analysis.

As for follow-up care, of 9086 adults in the population from which the CHeCS cohort was drawn who had a positive HCV-antibody test during 2006 through 2008, a total of 3428 (38%) had no follow-up HCV RNA testing documented in the electronic database1; but since there was laboratory evidence of HCV RNA testing for 63% (though results of tests performed outside the participating health care networks could not be obtained), this percentage should be viewed as the minimum proportion who received at least some follow-up care. In the NHANES, 77% of respondents indicated that they had seen a clinician after their first HCV test result; these included 71 of 82 persons who knew they were infected before they were tested in the NHANES (87%) and 59 of 85 persons who discovered their infection because of their participation (69%). From these data it seems reasonable to deduce that 63 to 77% of people who have tested positive for HCV antibodies - 32 to 38% of all HCV-infected people in the United States - received follow-up hepatitis care.

Among those receiving care, such as the 8810 who were initially examined in the CHeCS, 5540 (63%) had had at least one HCV RNA measurement between 2001 and 2010. Of the HCV-infected people in the CHeCS - people who are more likely than average to be receiving specialist care for HCV - 3380 (38%) had undergone a liver biopsy between 2001 and 2010.1 In the NHANES, of 66 persons who said they received care for their HCV infection, 31 (47%) said they had undergone a biopsy. These proportions translate to about 12 to 18% of the total HCV-infected population.

In the CHeCS, 36% of people who knew they were infected - about 18% of the estimated total infected population who had been identified as infected - had evidence in their electronic or hard-copy chart of any treatment for HCV.1 In the NHANES, 22 of the 170 HCV-infected persons who answered follow-up surveys (13%) said they had received treatment for HCV infection.3

It is more difficult to determine whether treatment has been successful, but in the CHeCS the most recent test results indicated that HCV RNA was "undetectable" in 21% of patients, and 80% of patients with such results had documentation of having received antiviral therapy1 - that is, about 17% of the total CHeCS cohort, or about 5 to 6% of all HCV-infected people.

One limitation of both the CHeCS and the NHANES results is that because estimates are unavoidably based on progressively smaller numbers of patients, they have wide confidence intervals. Both studies were biased toward following (in the CHeCS) or recruiting for interview (in the NHANES) persons who were more likely to have health insurance and to be receiving health care; thus, the resulting estimates may actually be high. Still, these data and estimates derive from two large U.S. studies using different methods and sampling sources, one a managed-care population (CHeCS) with the largest cohort of HCV-infected patients in the United States and the other the noninstitutionalized civilian U.S. population (NHANES). Despite the different methods and unavoidable selection biases, the results appear to be consistent and credible.

This big picture suggests that there are many points of intervention - or opportunities - to improve the identification and care of patients with HCV and to mitigate the increase in hospitalizations and deaths resulting from HCV infection. For example, the CDC recently recommended a one-time test for everyone born between 1945 and 19655 to help identify the many infected people who would not be targeted for testing as the result of established risk-based testing strategies. Clearly, there is also a need to do a better job of getting HCV-infected persons who know their HCV status into care, evaluated, and, as appropriate, treated. It is past time to address more vigorously what Assistant Secretary for Health Howard Koh has called the silent epidemic of viral hepatitis.

The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Source

Current and Future Therapies for Hepatitis C Virus Infection, from NIH

Provided by NATAP

Download the PDF here

Download the PDF here

"robust health care infrastructure will be needed.....infrastructure in the current U.S. health care system is woefully inadequate....Successful treatment of HCV infection has undeniable long-term benefits with respect to reducing morbidity and mortality......most challenging issue is not whether there will be medical tools to effectively manage and treat HCV infection, but whether the economic resources and societal commitment will be adequate to embark on an ambitious agenda to eliminate this global public health problem."

T. Jake Liang, M.D., and Marc G. Ghany, M.D., M.H.Sc.
From the Liver Diseases Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
N Engl J Med May 16 2013

"Conclusions: If the past is a harbinger of the future, therapy for HCV infection will probably continue to advance at a brisk pace. Many additional potent agents are in the clinical pipeline, and interferon-free regimens are likely to dominate the HCV therapeutic landscape within the next 5 years. If a simple treatment regimen becomes a reality, a robust health care infrastructure will be needed to identify, triage, and treat the millions of HCV-infected patients who are unaware of their status. The infrastructure in the current U.S. health care system is woefully inadequate. The rate of death from HCV infection has already outpaced the rate of death from HIV infection in the United States.71 Successful treatment of HCV infection has undeniable long-term benefits with respect to reducing morbidity and mortality.26-29Perhaps the most challenging issue is not whether there will be medical tools to effectively manage and treat HCV infection, but rather whether the economic resources and societal commitment will be adequate to embark on an ambitious agenda to eliminate this global public health problem."

Only 20 years after the discovery of the hepatitis C virus (HCV), a cure is now likely for most people affected by this chronic infection, which carries a substantial disease burden, not only in the United States but also worldwide.1 The recent approval of two direct-acting antiviral agents that specifically inhibit viral replication has dramatically increased the viral clearance rate, from less than 10% with the initial regimen of interferon monotherapy to more than 70% with current therapy. Moreover, many other drugs targeting viral or host factors are in development, and some will almost certainly be approved in the coming years. The questions of who should be treated and with what regimen will be increasingly complex to address and will require careful consideration. As therapy improves, systemwide identification and care of patients who need treatment will be the next challenge. Because most infected persons are unaware of their diagnosis, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently recommended screening for HCV all persons born between 1945 and 1965. 2,3 It is anticipated that in the course of such a screening process, a large number of persons will be found to be infected with the virus; whether it will be possible to treat all these people is unclear. This article reviews the current therapy for HCV infection and the landscape of drug development.

Mechanism of Action of Therapy for HCV Infection

Basic research aimed at understanding the molecular pathways of the life cycle of the virus has been the engine that has driven the development of therapies for HCV infection over the past 20 years. HCV is a positive-strand RNA virus encoding a polyprotein that undergoes proteolytic cleavage to 10 polypeptides, each with distinct functions (Figure 1). The structural proteins consist of two envelope glycoproteins, both of which are targets of host antibody response, and the core protein, which interacts with progeny viral genomes for assembly of the virus.8 The nonstructural proteins NS2, NS3, NS4A, NS4B, NS5A, and NS5B form a complex with viral RNA to initiate viral replication in a cytoplasmic membranous structure.8 Assembly of HCV requires close interactions with lipid droplets and lipoprotein metabolism.9 Mature virus is released from cells as lipoviral particles.10 HCV infects predominantly hepatocytes and has an uncanny ability to evade the host immune response in multiple ways.11

Interferon alfa is a potent inhibitor of HCV replication that acts by inducing interferon-stimulated host genes that have antiviral functions. Its pegylated form remains a mainstay of HCV therapy. By virtue of its diverse actions on HCV, interferon alfa is not associated with viral resistance. A lack of clinical response to interferon alfa is the result of chronic HCV infection that confers resistance to exogenous interferon alfa in the liver by interfering with host interferon response and interferon-stimulated gene expression.12 Ribavirin, a key component of the therapeutic regimen, acts synergistically with and is used in combination with interferon alfa in the treatment of HCV infection; it probably has multiple mechanisms of action.13

Recent efforts to develop antiviral agents for the treatment of HCV infection have focused on small-molecule inhibitors of HCV infection (Figure 1), which can be categorized on the basis of the target of action. Some antiviral agents act directly on viral targets, whereas others target host proteins that are vital to HCV replication. The initial effort focused on two viral-encoded enzymes, the NS3/4A serine protease, which cleaves the HCV polyprotein, and the NS5B RNA-dependent RNA polymerase. The first two direct-acting antiviral agents that were approved, telaprevir and boceprevir, are inhibitors of the NS3/4A protease.14Another target, the NS5A viral protein, has gained traction recently because of its importance in the assembly of the cytoplasmic membrane-bound replication complex and the high potency of its inhibitors as indicated by in vitro studies and studies involving humans.15 Additional viral proteins, such as core protein (which has a role in assembly of the virus), p7 (which forms ion channels involved in assembly of the virus), and NS4B (which has a role in the formation of the replication complex), are being explored as drug targets (Figure 1).16-19

Promising host targets include cyclophilin A and miR122. Cyclophilin A is a crucial component of the viral replication complex.8 Cyclosporin A, a cyclophilin A inhibitor, is a potent inhibitor of HCV replication in cell culture. Its derivatives, such as alisporivir, NIM811, and SCY-635, which lack immunosuppressive properties, are being tested in clinical trials.20 MiR122 is a microRNA that is expressed abundantly in the liver and binds to viral RNA to facilitate replication.21 A nucleic acid inhibitor of miR122 (miravirsen) potently inhibits HCV replication in the chimpanzee model and in humans.22,23 Entry factors are other potential host targets; inhibitors of these factors block the access of HCV into cells (Figure 1).4 Inhibitors of viral entry may be particularly important for the treatment of patients undergoing liver transplantation, because patients with HCV infection are invariably reinfected after transplantation, and post-transplantation hepatitis C remains a major challenge to manage and treat.24

Therapy for HCV Infection, Genotype 1
Current Standard of Care

The goal of therapy for chronic hepatitis C is eradication of the virus, which should limit or prevent the development of complications. The end point of successful therapy is a sustained virologic response, defined as undetectable HCV RNA in serum 24 weeks after treatment has been stopped.25 This end point is predictive of long-term eradication of the virus and correlates with a reduction in symptoms and in the rate of negative clinical outcomes. 26-29 The combination of peginterferon and ribavirin has been the standard of care for patients with chronic hepatitis C, regardless of the strain of the virus (genotype 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6).25 This regimen results in rates of sustained virologic response of 70 to 80% among patients with HCV genotype 2 or 3 infection and rates of 45 to 70% among patients with any of the other genotypes.25

The approval of boceprevir and telaprevir has led to triple therapy for HCV genotype 1 infection - one of these two protease inhibitors in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin.30-33 These two triple-therapy regimens result in similar response rates but differ greatly with respect to the timing of administration (both when they should be administered and for how long) (Figure 2).30-34 Neither boceprevir nor telaprevir should be used alone, nor should the dose of either drug be reduced, because drug-resistant variants can emerge rapidly.35,36 Similarly, one agent should not be substituted for the other because they have very different treatment schedules and similar drug-resistant mutations. They are not approved for use in patients who have HCV infection with genotypes other than genotype 1. Either peginterferon-alfa-2a or peginterferon-alfa-2b may be used in the regimen.37

Challenges of Triple-Therapy Regimens

Although the approved triple-therapy regimens are more efficacious than a regimen of peginterferon and ribavirin without a protease inhibitor, they have additional side effects and are quite complex to adhere to because patients must take an increased number of pills and the schedule requires pills to be taken every 8 hours. The most common side effects with boceprevir are anemia, neutropenia, and dysgeusia (altered taste sensation),30,31 and the most common side effects with telaprevir are anemia, rash, and anorectal discomfort.32,33 Anemia (a hemoglobin level of <10 g per deciliter) occurs in 36 to 50% of cases and is the most challenging complication to manage. 30,32

Erythrocyte-stimulating agents have been used with some success to manage the anemia, but these agents have serious side effects, are costly, and are not approved for routine use in patients with chronic hepatitis C.30,38 Studies have shown that a reduction in the dose of ribavirin, even as early as week 2 and to a level as low as 600 mg per day, is an effective strategy for managing anemia and is the recommended first approach.38,39

DrugÐdrug interactions constitute another concern. Boceprevir is metabolized by the aldo-ketoÐreductase and Cyp3A4/5 pathways and telaprevir by the Cyp3A pathway.40,41 Both molecules are inhibitors of Cyp3A4 and P-glycoprotein transporter.42 Cyp3A enzymes are abundant in the liver and are involved in the metabolism of many drugs. The activities of these enzymes can also be reduced in advanced liver disease. Therefore, when these agents are administered, one should consider not only the effects of coadministered drugs on boceprevir and telaprevir levels but also the effects of boceprevir and telaprevir on the levels of other drugs. A number of medications, such as certain statins, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, analgesics, and sedatives, are contraindicated with these agents.41,43 All prescribers of boceprevir and telaprevir are strongly advised to check for the effects of drugÐdrug interactions before administering these agents. Important information can be obtained from a number of useful websites, from the prescribing information disseminated with the drugs, and from review articles.41-43

Antiviral resistance is another major concern and may develop as early as 4 days after initiation of the drug when these agents are used as monotherapy.35,36 The various drugs in the class of protease inhibitors have a similar pattern of drug-resistant mutations, which means that if resistance-associated variants emerge when one agent is used, another agent in the same class would not be effective. Therefore, patients who no longer have a response to one of the approved regimens should not be treated with the other. Once the drug is stopped, resistance-associated variants disappear over time, probably because they do not replicate as efficiently as does the wild-type virus. Certain mutations may persist in the viral population in a given patient for 3 years or longer after discontinuation of therapy.44,45 Adherence to the prescribed regimen and dietary considerations (to maximize absorption of the drug) should be reinforced with patients to limit the development of antiviral resistance. There are scant data on the efficacy of these approved regimens in difficult-to-treat populations that traditionally have lower response rates to peginterferon and ribavirin, such as patients with cirrhosis or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection and patients who have undergone liver transplantation. In phase 3 trials of boceprevir and telaprevir, patients with cirrhosis, accounting for only approximately 10% of the populations studied, had lower rates of sustained virologic response than did patients without cirrhosis. Although the numbers of patients with cirrhosis were small, there was a trend toward lower response rates with response-guided regimens, and patients with cirrhosis should therefore receive 48 weeks of therapy.30-33 In preliminary studies, the response rate among patients with HIV coinfection was similar to that among patients without HIV coinfection, but the approved regimens are problematic in patients who have undergone liver transplantation because of drugÐdrug interactions and serious side effects.46-48

Indications for Triple Therapy

The indications for the approved triple therapy remain the same as those for peginterferon and ribavirin. The patient must have documented viremia, no contraindications to therapy, and no serious coexisting illness.25 It is particularly important to consider initiating treatment promptly in patients with an advanced stage of fibrosis (Ishak fibrosis score of 4, 5, or 6 on liver biopsy [with scores ranging from 0 to 6 and higher scores indicating greater degrees of fibrosis]) (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org) because these patients are at the greatest risk for disease progression.49 The benefits of a sustained virologic response - lower rates of hepatic decompensation, amelioration of symptoms, and a reduction in the risk of liver-related death - particularly among patients with advanced liver disease, have been firmly established.26-29 The availability of boceprevir and telaprevir has not significantly changed the riskÐbenefit ratio of therapy for a number of reasons. First, the side effects of triple therapy are worse than those of peginterferon and ribavirin. Second, response rates among the patients who stand to benefit the most from treatment - those with cirrhosis - remain relatively low. Third, antiviral resistance develops in most patients who have not had a response to treatment.30,32 Better, and presumably safer, interferon-free regimens will probably be available in the not-too-distant future.

Which patients with HCV genotype 1 infection should be considered for therapy with the currently approved regimens? Previously untreated patients without cirrhosis and patients with an initial response to treatment who subsequently had a relapse after stopping therapy - the two populations in which high rates of response have been reported - are good candidates for therapy (Figure 3).30-33 However, patients with mild disease who have not received prior treatment can probably defer therapy and wait for more effective and safer regimens to become available. Patients with cirrhosis and those who have not had a response to prior therapy stand to benefit the most from triple therapy but have the lowest response rates.30-33 An individualized approach is recommended for all patients, once the benefits of therapy, the likelihood of a response, and the potential side effects of treatment have been discussed. The efficacy of the two approved triple regimens is similar, although they have not been directly compared. Factors such as the patient's preference, the duration of protease-inhibitor administration, the side-effect profile, and the cost should be considered in selecting a regimen.

Therapy for HCV Infection, Genotypes 2 through 6

The combination of peginterferon and ribavirin remains the recommended therapy for HCV genotypes 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 infection (Figure 3).25 Preliminary results of a study of a polymerase inhibitor (sofosbuvir) in combination with ribavirin, administered for 12 weeks, showed a 100% rate of sustained virologic response among patients with HCV genotype 2 or 3 infection.53 As reported in this issue of the Journal, two phase 3 trials of the same oral combination showed similar response rates among patients with genotype 2 infection (93% and 97% in the two studies) but much lower response rates among patients with genotype 3 infection (56% and 61% in the two studies),51,52 indicating that better oral regimens are still needed for patients with genotype 3 infection. Activities of various direct-acting antiviral agents against other genotypes are also being investigated.

Therapies in Clinical Development
Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents

The major drawback of boceprevir and telaprevir is their limited antiviral efficacy in patients with HCV infections other than genotype 1 and their low genetic barrier to resistance (Table 1). There are about a dozen second-generation protease inhibitors in phase 2Ð3 development that are better than the first-generation agents.54 Two classes of NS5B polymerase inhibitors - nucleoside and nonnucleoside analogue inhibitors - are being developed. The nucleoside inhibitors target the conserved nucleotide-binding pocket of the enzyme and function as chain terminators. The nonnucleoside inhibitors bind to other regions of NS5B and act as allosteric inhibitors. There are about eight NS5A inhibitors and more than a dozen NS5B inhibitors in phase 2Ð3 studies. The properties of these newer agents are summarized in Table 1. All the above agents are being tested in clinical trials in various combinations, with or without ribavirin or peginterferon. NS4B and p7 viral proteins are also being explored as alternative targets of direct-acting antiviral agents (Table 1). In general, the drugs targeting NS4B and p7 are not as potent as those that target NS3/4A, NS5A, and NS5B and have a relatively narrow genotypic coverage.18,55

Host-Targeting Antiviral Agents

Inhibitors of cyclophilin A and of miR122 are promising host-targeting antiviral agents that have advanced to phase 2 or 3 clinical trials (Figure 1 and Table 1). Alisporivir, an inhibitor of cyclophilin A with broad genotypic coverage, has shown reasonable potency in a 14-day monotherapy trial (approximately a 3 log10 reduction in HCV levels).56 Related compounds such as SCY-635 and NIM811 are being tested in clinical trials.57,58 Mutations conferring viral resistance to this class of compounds can emerge in the NS5A protein but occur less frequently than with direct-acting antiviral agents.56 A combination of alisporivir with peginterferon and ribavirin has shown improved efficacy over peginterferon and ribavirin alone, both in patients who have received prior treatment and in those who have not.20 The drug is currently on hold at the Food and Drug Administration because of several cases of severe pancreatitis that may have been associated with it. In a phase 2a trial, miravirsen, a drug that targets miR122 and is administered subcutaneously once a week, has led to a modest reduction in HCV levels (<3 logs10) after 5 weeks of monotherapy.23 The effects appear to last for several weeks after the last dose, and no resistant mutations have been identified.

Interferon-Free Regimens

For a number of reasons, an interferon-free regimen would be advantageous for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. Considerable progress has been made in this regard with the use of various combinations of direct-acting antiviral agents with or without ribavirin. Combining drugs that have different targets of action should result in an additive or synergistic antiviral effect while lessening the chance of antiviral resistance. The challenge is to identify the right combination of drugs with the highest potency and barrier to resistance and the best side-effect profile. What the final regimen will be remains to be determined. Currently, many combinations of protease, NS5A, and polymerase inhibitors, with or without ribavirin, are being evaluated. In a proof-of-concept study, patients with chronic hepatitis C, both those who had received prior treatment and those who had not, were treated with an interferon-free and ribavirin-free regimen consisting of the polymerase inhibitor RG7128 (a nucleoside inhibitor) and the protease inhibitor danoprevir, administered for 13 days, followed by peginterferon and ribavirin.59 A substantial proportion of patients who received the highest doses had undetectable HCV RNA levels after only 13 days, indicating that viral clearance could be achieved without the use of interferon or ribavirin.59 Several trials of other combinations of direct-acting antiviral agents have resulted in viral clearance in patients undergoing therapy.60,61 A study of the protease inhibitor asunaprevir in combination with the NS5A inhibitor daclatasvir, administered for 24 weeks in patients with genotype 1a or 1b infection who had not had a response to previous therapy, showed eradication of the virus in 4 of 11 patients (36%).62 Another study, which used the same regimen but only in patients with genotype 1b infection who had not had a response to previous therapy, showed a 90% rate of sustained virologic response.63 These latter studies highlight the effect of HCV subtype on the response to a regimen that consists entirely of direct-acting antiviral agents. The combination of a direct-acting antiviral agent with a host-targeting antiviral agent may circumvent the issue of the difference in response according to genotype. Two recent studies also showed high rates of sustained virologic response (80 to 90%) with other oral combinations among patients with HCV genotype 1 infection.53,64 For a discussion of other therapeutic approaches, see the Supplementary Appendix.

Precision Medicine in HCV Therapy

Advances in biomarker and genomic medicine have provided a unique opportunity to personalize the approach to treatment for patients with hepatitis C. Various clinical traits (e.g., the presence of cirrhosis) and virologic traits (e.g., genotype 1 vs. genotype 2 or 3) have already been incorporated into current regimens as the standard of care. In addition, monitoring the virologic response during treatment often determines the duration of therapy (response-guided therapy) (Figure 2). Demographic and other factors that have previously been found to correlate with a response to peginterferon and ribavirin are also important determinants of a response to the approved direct-acting antiviral regimens; these factors include younger age (<45 years), non-black race, lower body-mass index, no history of diabetes, absence of cirrhosis on liver biopsy, low baseline viral load (<800,000 IU per milliliter), and HCV subtype 1b.30-33 New biomarkers (e.g., serum IP10 levels) and genetic tests (e.g., to determine polymorphisms in the IL28B gene) appear to have strong predictive value with respect to interferon-based therapy.64 Polymorphisms in the inosine triphosphatase gene were recently identified as pharmacogenomic markers of ribavirin-induced anemia65,66; however, the polymorphisms conferring protection are rare in the general population, and screening for those polymorphisms is therefore not useful. Recent costÐbenefit analyses of data from a study in which a treatment regimen was chosen on the basis of the IL28B genotype suggest that patients with a favorable IL28B genotype, a subgroup in which the rate of a sustained virologic response approaches 80%, could receive peginterferon and ribavirin first, with the approved direct-acting antiviral regimen provided subsequently if the initial treatment failed.67 Although testing for the IL28B genotype has not been formally approved as a standard of care, such testing may be helpful if the patient or provider desires additional information on the probability of a response to treatment (Figure 3).14 However, since more potent anti-HCV drugs and interferon-free regimens are being developed, these markers may no longer be relevant.

Studies of the natural history of chronic HCV infection have shown that the majority of HCV-infected persons have an indolent course of liver disease that rarely progresses to life-threatening complications.68 Another personalized approach to treating patients with HCV infection may be to treat only those in whom severe disease is likely to develop. However, the clinical and genetic markers that have been identified in such patients do not have strong predictive power, and better predictive markers need to be identified.69,70

Conclusions

If the past is a harbinger of the future, therapy for HCV infection will probably continue to advance at a brisk pace. Many additional potent agents are in the clinical pipeline, and interferon-free regimens are likely to dominate the HCV therapeutic landscape within the next 5 years. If a simple treatment regimen becomes a reality, a robust health care infrastructure will be needed to identify, triage, and treat the millions of HCV-infected patients who are unaware of their status. The infrastructure in the current U.S. health care system is woefully inadequate. The rate of death from HCV infection has already outpaced the rate of death from HIV infection in the United States.71 Successful treatment of HCV infection has undeniable long-term benefits with respect to reducing morbidity and mortality.26-29Perhaps the most challenging issue is not whether there will be medical tools to effectively manage and treat HCV infection, but rather whether the economic resources and societal commitment will be adequate to embark on an ambitious agenda to eliminate this global public health problem.

Source

Hepatitis Testing Day

May 17, 2013 • By Ronald Valdiserri, M.D., M.P.H., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health, Infectious Diseases, and Director, Office of HIV/AIDS and Infectious Disease Policy, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Dr. Ronald Valdiserri

This week, we mark the second annual observance of Hepatitis Testing Day. Establishment of this national health awareness day on May 19 was called for in the Action Plan for the Prevention, Care and Treatment of Viral Hepatitis as part of efforts to decrease health disparities by raising greater public and health care provider awareness, particularly among those populations most affected by hepatitis B and C infections. To achieve the goals of the Action Plan, we must address the fact that millions of Americans have chronic hepatitis, but most of them do not know they are infected.

Unfortunately, too many Americans at risk for or living with hepatitis B or hepatitis C infections remain uninformed about various facets of viral hepatitis, including the need for testing and care, associated adverse health effects, and the availability of treatment. By raising the profile of these infections and the importance of testing, we hope to generate greater awareness and encourage more people to learn about their risk and discuss hepatitis testing with their health care providers.

As we approach Hepatitis Testing Day, I encourage you to learn more using the following resources:

  • Hepatitis Risk Assessment: Find out if you should be tested by taking a 5-minute online Hepatitis Risk Assessment. This CDC tool allows individuals to determine their risk for hepatitis B and hepatitis C by answering questions privately, either in their home or a health care setting. They can then print tailored recommendations based on CDC’s testing and vaccination guidelines for viral hepatitis to discuss with their doctor. Try the Hepatitis Risk Assessment out for yourself! We hope you’ll help us spread the word about the tool by sending out an online health e-card to your friends, colleagues and/or patients and by downloading free Hepatitis Risk Assessment web buttons and badges to feature on your website.
  • Baby Boomers at Higher Risk: According to the CDC, about 3 million adults in the U.S. are infected with the hepatitis C virus, and most of them are baby boomers. That’s why CDC recommends that all Americans born from 1945-1965 (the generation known as “baby boomers”) get tested for hepatitis C. People in this age group are five times more likely to have hepatitis C. Watch this brief new video Exit Disclaimer to learn more about why hepatitis C testing is important.
  • Hepatitis B Awareness for Asian Americans: Assistant Secretary for Health Dr. Howard Koh encourages Asian Americans to get tested for chronic hepatitis B in a free, downloadable poster that you can post and share with others. CDC also recently updated its page on Asian Americans and Hepatitis B.

Finally, in an important issue of CDC’s Vital Signs last week, we were reminded of the importance of confirmatory testing in the diagnosis of HCV infection. The issue discusses HCV testing among baby boomers and includes new findings from a CDC study indicating that only half of Americans with hepatitis C receive complete testing for the virus. A simple blood test, called a hepatitis C antibody test, can tell if you have been exposed to the hepatitis C virus, but cannot tell whether you are still infected. Only a different follow-up blood test – an RNA test – can determine if you are still infected. The data, based on reports sent to health departments in eight cities, show that only half of people with a positive hepatitis C antibody test had the follow-up test reported (diseases of public health significance, such as hepatitis C, are usually reported to local health departments when they are diagnosed to help identify disease trends and track outbreaks). The other half did not have a follow-up test reported (although some of them may have been tested but no report was done). Without the follow-up test, a person will not know if they still have hepatitis C and cannot get the medical care they need. As CDC notes, these findings suggest that HCV testing and reporting must improve if we are to meet the goal of the Action Plan to increase the proportion of persons who are aware of their infection.

We are pleased that many of the federal partners working to implement the Action Plan are joining in the observance of Hepatitis Testing Day, raising awareness of the observance among their staff, grantees, providers, and other stakeholders. We urge you to join us, too, by learning more and sharing what you learn with others. Together we can make this second annual Hepatitis Testing Day a great success by raising awareness of viral hepatitis and encouraging complete testing for those who may be chronically infected.

Related posts:

  1. Hepatitis Testing Saves Lives
  2. May 19 Is Hepatitis Testing Day
  3. CDC Invites Public Comment on Draft Recommendations for One-Time Hepatitis C Testing for Baby Boomers
  4. May Is Hepatitis Awareness Month
  5. CDC Launches Hepatitis Testing Day Event Page

Source

Hep C rising in baby boomers, but can they be treated?

By Rose Egge Published: May 17, 2013 at 10:56 AM PDT Last Updated: May 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM PDT

SEATTLE – If you’re a baby boomer, the United States Centers for Disease Control is recommending you get tested for Hepatitis C, regardless of whether or not you have any other risk factors. But, treatment may not be readily available for newly diagnosed patients, and the Affordable Care Act could make things even worse.

Hepatitis C can lead to liver cancer, liver failure and cirrhosis – irreversible and potentially fatal scarring of the liver. The virus kills about 600 people in Washington each year, and death rates have been steadily rising since 2005.

Of the 3.2 million people in the United States living with Hepatitis C, the CDC estimates 75 percent are baby boomers, and the majority don’t know they’re infected. Researchers don’t know why prevalence is so high among this group, but many blame blood transfusions before donations started being screened for Hepatitis C in 1990, as well as unsafe needle practices before HIV education.

If Hepatitis C is detected, treatments can effectively prevent serious symptoms and even cure the virus in 70 percent of patients, said Dr. John Scott, an infectious disease specialist with the University of Washington.

Still, treatment options are not widely available and can be cost prohibitive, discouraging some people from being tested at all.

“It doesn’t make sense to test people and put them through that mental trauma if we don’t have treatment for them,” Scott said.

Scott said it can be challenging for providers to keep up with emerging treatment options, especially for rural doctors who are more isolated and see fewer patients.

“It’s not fair that people get substandard care just because of where they live,” Scott said.

Patients can also be unaware of new, promising treatment options. Michael Ninburg, executive director of the Hepatitis Education Project in Seattle, said most don’t know about emerging therapies that could cure Hepatitis C without the drug interferon, a common, but toxic therapy that can cause depression, fever and hair loss.

“Those who test positive are not getting treated because of horror stories they hear [about interferon,]” Ninberg said.

Kathy Perkins, a disease intervention specialist with the Snohomish Health District, said many of her clients chose not to be screened for Hepatitis C because they don’t believe anything can be done if they are infected.

“I talk to people on a weekly basis who are Hepatitis C positive but don’t know it’s curable,” Perkins said.

But even those who find treatment options may still go untreated because of insurance and cost concerns.

According to Scott, 50 percent of Hepatitis C patients are uninsured. While some drug manufacturers offer free medications to Hepatitis C patients who don’t have insurance, this does not cover the cost of provider care.

Perkins said cost can keep many from being treated.

“People feel like ‘Great I’m Hepatitis C positive now how am I going to pay for treatment?’” she said.

Perkins does not believe healthcare reform will help Hepatitis C patients seeking treatment. While Medicaid covers treatment, she said finding a doctor who accepts state-funded insurance can be challenging.

In fact, Perkins said the Affordable Care Act is likely to lengthen the waiting lists among doctors who do treat Hepatitis C.

“I think it’s going to be a big problem with not enough providers offering treatment,” she said.

Already, doctors at rural clinics have backlogs of patients waiting for treatment. Dr. David Hachey, a pharmacist in Idaho said his family medicine clinic can only see Hepatitis patients one day every other week.

“We are at maximum capacity,” Hachey said. “We have a large subset of patients preparing for treatment or waiting for new medications to be approved.”

Some doctors are trying to combat lack of treatment options. The University of Washington’s Project ECHO (see slideshow for more information) connects clinics from Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Montana and Washington with specialists who have more experience treating Hepatitis.

“I know how to treat Hepatitis C but we’re dealing with nasty drugs,” said Dr. Geoff Jones, a Newport, Wash., doctor who participates is Project ECHO. “It’s nice to have a bunch of people to discuss side effects with.”

But, until treatment becomes more readily available and affordable, Hepatitis C deaths, especially among baby boomers, could continue to rise.

Source

May is National Hepatitis Awareness Month

Thursday, 16 May 2013 13:40 Minnesota Department of Health

Health officials advise all people between the age of 48 and 68 to get a hepatitis C test
In observance of Hepatitis Awareness Month (May), health officials are calling for all U.S. baby boomers - the generation born from 1945 through 1965 - to get a one-time test for the hepatitis C virus. According to the Minnesota Department of Health, there are currently about 39,000 people living with hepatitis C in Minnesota.

Hepatitis C causes serious liver diseases, including liver cancer (the fastest-rising cause of cancer-related deaths) and is the leading cause of liver transplants in the United States. Hepatitis C is usually spread by blood, through sharing needles or other equipment to inject drugs. Before widespread screening of the blood supply began in 1992, hepatitis C was also unknowingly spread through blood transfusions and organ transplants. One in 30 baby boomers has been infected with hepatitis C and most don't know it.

"To identify undetected cases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are recommending a one-time blood test for hepatitis C for everyone between the ages of 48 and 68," said Dr. Edward Ehlinger, Minnesota Commissioner of Health. "Following the new recommendations can protect the health of an entire generation of Americans from liver disease and save thousands of lives."

More than 15,000 Americans, most of them baby boomers, die each year from hepatitis C-related illness, such as cirrhosis and liver cancer, and deaths have been increasing steadily for over a decade and are projected to grow significantly in coming years. More than 2 million U.S. baby boomers are infected with hepatitis C - accounting for more than 75 percent of all American adults living with the virus.

"Studies show that many individuals were infected with the virus decades ago, do not perceive themselves to be at risk, and have never been screened," said Ehlinger. "Getting tested and treated now can offset many of the long term consequences."

CDC estimates one-time hepatitis C testing of people between 48 and 68 years of age could identify more than 800,000 additional people with hepatitis C. With newly available therapies that can cure up to 75 percent of infections, expanded testing - along with linkage to appropriate care and treatment - would prevent the costly consequences of liver cancer and other chronic liver diseases and save more than 120,000 lives.

Health officials recommend baby boomers and others who may have had blood exposures talk with their health care provider about getting a test for hepatitis C. For additional information about hepatitis C testing recommendations, visit http://www.cdc.gov/knowmorehepatitis/index.htm.

Source

Salix Pharmaceuticals Outlines Data Presentations at Digestive Disease Week 2013

May 17, 2013 07:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time

DDW 2013

RALEIGH, N.C.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (NASDAQ:SLXP) today announced that presentations related to the investigation of two of the Company’s products are scheduled to take place during Digestive Disease Week DDW®2013. DDW2013 is being held in Orlando, FL, Saturday, May 18 – Tuesday, May 21.

Rifaximin-Related Presentations

Poster #Su1298: Neff et al. “Improved Outcomes in Hepatic Encephalopathy Using Rifaximin Monotherapy Compared to Rifaximin and Lactulose Combination Therapy”

Poster #1300: Neff et al. “Efficacy and Tolerability of Rifaximin in Hepatitis C Patients with Recurrent Hepatic Encephalopathy”

Poster #1687: Hassanein et al. “Utility of the Hepatic Encephalopathy Scoring Algorithm (HESA) for Diagnosing Hepatic Encephalopathy in a Randomized, Controlled Trial of Rifaximin vs. Placebo”

Mesalamine-Related Presentation

Poster #Su1222: Lichtenstein et al. “Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of Once-Daily Mesalamine Extended-Release Capsules in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis”

About XIFAXAN® (rifaximin) 550 mg tablets

Indication for XIFAXAN® 550 mg

XIFAXAN 550 mg is a rifamycin antibacterial indicated for reduction in risk of overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE) recurrence in patients ≥ 18 years of age.

Important Safety Information for XIFAXAN® 550 mg

XIFAXAN (rifaximin) 550 mg tablets are contraindicated in patients with a hypersensitivity to rifaximin, any of the rifamycin antimicrobial agents, or any of the components in XIFAXAN. Hypersensitivity reactions have included exfoliative dermatitis, angioneurotic edema, and anaphylaxis.

Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has been reported with use of nearly all antibacterial agents, including XIFAXAN, and may range in severity from mild diarrhea to fatal colitis. Treatment with antibacterial agents alters the normal flora of the colon which may lead to overgrowth of C. difficile. If CDAD is suspected or confirmed, ongoing antibiotic use not directed against C. difficile may need to be discontinued.

There is increased systemic exposure in patients with more severe hepatic dysfunction. The clinical trials were limited to patients with MELD scores < 25. Therefore, caution should be exercised when administering XIFAXAN to patients with severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh C).

Based on animal data, XIFAXAN may cause fetal harm. Discontinue in nursing mothers after taking into account the importance of the drug to the mother.

The most common adverse reactions occurring in ≥ 10% of patients and at a higher incidence than placebo in the clinical study were edema peripheral (15%), nausea (14%), dizziness (13%), fatigue (12%), and ascites (11%).

Xifaxan 550 mg is not available for sale outside the U.S.

Xifaxan 550 mg is licensed by Alfa Wassermann S.p.A. to Salix Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

About APRISO® (mesalamine)

Indication for APRISO® (mesalamine)

APRISO® is a locally-acting aminosalicylate indicated for the maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis in adults.

Important Safety Information for APRISO® (mesalamine)

APRISO® (mesalamine) extended-release capsules are contraindicated in patients with hypersensitivity to salicylates or aminosalicylates (sulfasalazine), or to any of the components of APRISO capsules.

It is recommended that patients have an evaluation of renal function prior to initiation of APRISO therapy and periodically while on therapy. Exercise caution when using APRISO in patients with known renal dysfunction or a history of renal disease.

Mesalamine has been associated with an acute intolerance syndrome that may be difficult to distinguish from a flare of inflammatory bowel disease. Symptoms include cramping, acute abdominal pain and bloody diarrhea, sometimes fever, headache, and rash. If acute intolerance syndrome is suspected, promptly discontinue treatment with APRISO.

There have been reports of hepatic failure in patients with pre-existing liver disease who have been administered mesalamine. Caution should be exercised when administering APRISO to patients with liver disease.

Because dissolution of the coating of APRISO granules depends on pH, APRISO should not be co-administered with antacids. Caution should be taken to closely monitor blood cell counts during mesalamine therapy in patients ages 65 and older. Patients with phenylketonuria should be aware that APRISO contains aspartame, equivalent to 2.24 mg of phenylalanine per day.

The most common treatment-related adverse events occurring in at least 3% of adult patients taking APRISO and at a rate greater than placebo in clinical trials were headache (11%), diarrhea (8%), upper abdominal pain (5%), nausea (4%), nasopharyngitis (4%), influenza and influenza-like illness (4%), and sinusitis (3%).

About Salix

Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina, develops and markets prescription pharmaceutical products for the prevention and treatment of gastrointestinal diseases. Salix’s strategy is to in-license late-stage or marketed proprietary therapeutic products, complete any required development and regulatory submission of these products, and market them through the Company’s gastroenterology specialty sales and marketing team.

Salix markets XIFAXAN® (rifaximin) tablets 200 mg and 550 mg, MOVIPREP® (PEG 3350, Sodium Sulfate, Sodium Chloride, Potassium Chloride, Sodium Ascorbate and Ascorbic Acid for Oral Solution), OSMOPREP® (sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate, USP and sodium phosphate dibasic anhydrous, USP) Tablets, APRISO®(mesalamine) extended-release capsules 0.375 g, GIAZO™ (balsalazide disodium) tablets, COLAZAL® (balsalazide disodium) Capsules, METOZOLV® ODT (metoclopramide HCl), RELISTOR®(methylnaltrexone bromide) Subcutaneous Injection, FULYZAQ™ (crofelemer) delayed-release tablets, SOLESTA®, DEFLUX®, PEPCID® (famotidine) for Oral Suspension, DIURIL® (Chlorothiazide) Oral Suspension, AZASAN® (Azathioprine) Tablets, USP, 75/100 mg, ANUSOL-HC® 2.5% (Hydrocortisone Cream, USP), ANUSOL-HC®25 mg Suppository (Hydrocortisone Acetate), PROCTOCORT® Cream (Hydrocortisone Cream, USP) 1% and PROCTOCORT® Suppository (Hydrocortisone Acetate Rectal Suppositories) 30 mg. Budesonide foam, RELISTOR® , LUMACAN and rifaximin for additional indications are under development.

For full prescribing information and important safety information on Salix products, including BOXED WARNINGS for OSMOPREP, AZASAN and METOZOLV, please visit www.salix.com where the Company promptly posts press releases, SEC filings and other important information or contact the Company at 919 862-1000 .

Salix trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol “SLXP”.

For more information, please visit our Website at www.salix.com or contact the Company at 919-862-1000. Follow us on Twitter (@SalixPharma) and Facebook (www.facebook.com/SalixPharma). Information on our Twitter feed, Facebook page and web site is not incorporated in our SEC filings.

Please Note: The materials provided herein that are not historical facts are or might constitute forward-looking statements under the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Although we believe the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, our expectations might not be attained. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks that could cause actual results to differ materially from expected results. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations expressed in the report include, among others: our dependence on our first seven pharmaceutical products, particularly Xifaxan, and the uncertainty of market acceptance of our products; the high cost and uncertainty of the research, clinical trials and other development activities involving pharmaceutical products; the unpredictability of the duration and results of regulatory review of New Drug Applications and Investigational New Drug Applications; intense competition, including from generics in an increasingly global market; the possible impairment of, or inability to obtain intellectual property rights and the costs of obtaining such rights from third parties in an increasingly global market; general economic conditions; our need to maintain profitability; the uncertainty of obtaining, and our dependence on, third parties to manufacture and sell our products; results of ongoing and any future litigation and investigations and other risk factors detailed from time to time in our other SEC filings.

Contacts

Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
Adam C. Derbyshire, 919-862-1000
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
or
G. Michael Freeman, 919-862-1000
Associate Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications

Source

Organ donor cards hard to implement in China, official says

BEIJING | Fri May 17, 2013 7:30am EDT

BEIJING (Reuters) - A system of donor cards indicating consent for organ transplants will not work in China as families will insist on having the final say, and many people see nothing wrong in using organs from executed prisoners, an official said on Friday.

Nearly 1.5 million people in China need transplants every year, but only 10,000 can get organs, according to the Health Ministry.

Many of those organs are taken from executed criminals and rights groups say it is often done without their consent - something the government denies, even as it tries to move away from obtaining organs from death-row inmates.

"China has an obvious family hierarchy," Huang Jiefu, who oversees transplants for the ministry, told a news conference when asked whether China could adopt an organ donor card system as practiced in countries like the United States and Britain.

"Every Chinese family has a core figure - be it the grandfather, father or grandmother - and this person has the final say," he said.

In traditional Chinese thought, the body is a sacrosanct gift from your parents not to be defiled, Huang said.

"That's why it won't work without family consent," he said.

However, Huang was optimistic that attitudes were changing, citing a ministry survey that found 70 percent of young people had no problem with organ donation.

China in 2007 banned organ transplants from living donors, except spouses, blood relatives and step or adopted family members, but launched a national system to coordinate donations after death in 2009. The organ shortage has driven a trade in illegal organ trafficking in the country.

Huang repeated that the goal was to reduce reliance on prisoners for organs by 2015, though he did not give any figures and China does not publish its death penalty numbers.

Still, many Chinese believe there is nothing wrong in using the organs of executed prisoners for transplants, he said.

"The legal philosophy of the death penalty is 'an eye for an eye' or 'a life for a life'. The public believes that saving a life is a worthy redemption of a dead prisoner.

"Every organ donation from executed prisoners has written consent from both the individual and the family," added Huang, who is an Australian-trained liver transplant surgeon.

But eventually, China will probably abolish the death penalty, so it will have to develop alternatives, he said.

"Depending on death row inmates for donations will lead China's organ transplants to a dead end."

(Reporting by Hui Li and Terril Yue Jones; Writing by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Robert Birsel)

Source

May 15, 2013

Disclosing Hep C Status in the Workplace

May 15, 2013

Deciding whether or not to tell your boss you have Hepatitis C is a multifaceted issue that requires education, planning and support.

Sharing your Hepatitis C status with employers or coworkers can be riddled with complexity. Whether interviewing for a new job, changing health insurance plans, being recently diagnosed or about to begin antiviral therapy, there are many factors to consider before disclosing that you have chronic Hepatitis C. There are no hard and fast rules for how to handle this topic, especially since each individual’s health and employment situation are unique. Knowing where the law lies and reviewing some of the issues involved are helpful when navigating the challenge of Hepatitis C disclosure at work.

Drug Stigma

The stigma associated with Hepatitis C infection represents the biggest barrier to disclosing having this viral illness. More specifically, the hardest stigma to confront relates to the assumption that this infection is due to injection drug use. This could – or could not – be the source of your infection, as there are countless ways Hepatitis C is spread. Regardless of how you acquired Hepatitis C, our society lacks compassion and understanding about injection drug use:

  • Those who never used injection drugs do not want to be associated with it.
  • Former injection drug users may feel haunted by their past and want to forget it.
  • Active injection drug users carry the burden of having two stigmatized diseases – addiction and Hepatitis C.

Continue reading this entire article here .....