Cost‐effectiveness of sofosbuvir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C‐infected patients

The efficacy of treatment for hepatitis C genotype 1 infection has significantly improved with the introduction of first‐generation protease inhibitors. However, there remains a need for effective treatments for patients infected with other genotypes, for nonresponders and patients unsuitable for interferon. Sofosbuvir is the first nucleotide polymerase inhibitor with pan‐genotypic activity. Sofosbuvir‐based regimens have resulted in >90% sustained virological response across treatment‐naïve genotype 1–6 patients in five phase III clinical trials of sofosbuvir administered with ribavirin or pegylated interferon and ribavirin. This analysis evaluates the cost‐effectiveness of sofosbuvir within the current licensed indication, for genotype 1–6 in the UK. A Markov model followed a cohort of 10 000 patients over lifetime, with approximately 20% initiating treatment for compensated cirrhosis. Sofosbuvir‐regimens were compared to telaprevir, boceprevir, pegylated interferon and ribavirin, or no treatment. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. The cost perspective utilized costs applicable to the National Health Service in the UK. Sofosbuvir proved to be cost‐effective in most patient populations with incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) at £11 836/QALY and £7292/QALY against telaprevir and boceprevir, respectively. In genotype 3, sofosbuvir had a weighted ICER of £18 761/QALY. Sofosbuvir‐based regimens are a cost‐effective option for the majority of hepatitis C‐infected patients in the United Kingdom although the incremental cost‐effectiveness varies by genotype and regimen. Sofosbuvir and ribavirin is an alternative regimen for patients unsuitable for interferon.     

Interferon‐free therapies for patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 3 infection: A systematic review

Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with genotype 3 remains a challenge. The HCV elimination rate with direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs) is lower than the values reported for other HCV genotypes. In addition, genotype 3‐infected patients have a higher risk of disease progression and hepatocellular carcinoma. The aim of this study was to review the relevant literature concerning the treatment of HCV genotype 3 patients with interferon‐free regimens. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed/Medline, Embase and Web of Science electronic databases. Trials enrolling patients with chronic hepatitis C infection treated with DAAs with or without ribavirin were included. Two investigators independently evaluated the trials for inclusion criteria, risk of bias and data extraction. The primary outcome was sustained virological response (SVR). In total, 323 references were identified, and 29 met the inclusion criteria: 18 general clinical trials, three general observational studies, three studies in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis and four studies in HIV–HCV‐coinfected patients. Overall, 4068 genotype 3 patients were included. As compared with sofosbuvir and ribavirin for 24 weeks, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir for 12 weeks or sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks provided higher SVR rates, particularly in patients with cirrhosis. Treatment of patients with decompensated cirrhosis remains a great challenge. Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir+ribavirin for 12 weeks were associated with an SVR of 85% in these patients. In summary, treatment of HCV genotype 3 patients is improving rapidly, and this population may no longer be considered a difficult‐to‐treat subgroup in the near future.     

Sofosbuvir,a Significant Paradigm Change in HCV Treatment

Nucleotide compounds like sofosbuvir, acyclovir, and tenofovir have proven to be amongst the most potent orally available antiviral treatments. These drugs exhibit high efficacy and a wide therapeutic index, with demonstrated utility in a number of chronic viral infections. The approval of Sovaldi™, brand name for sofosbuvir, by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration heralded improvements in chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. Sofosbuvir was originally discovered by Pharmasset Corporation and named PSI-7977. It was subsequently acquired and advanced through phase 3 development by Gilead Sciences, Inc. In Sofosbuvir both a unique pharmacology and a high specificity for the HCV ribonucleic acid polymerase are present in a molecule that is well tolerated and highly efficacious. Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials have consistently demonstrated durable and high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR), curing patients in excess of 80% in all genotypes and >90% in treatment-naïve subjects being administered combination therapy with other agents. Harvoni^® is the combination of sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor ledipasvir in a fixed-dose oral tablet, and it has demonstrated high SVR rates in patients infected with HCV genotype 1, without the need for exogenous interferon and/or ribavirin. Here, we discuss the discovery, development, pharmacologic characterization, and results from the phase 3 trials of sofosbuvir. Hepatitis C is a chronic disease, for which most patients have been undiagnosed, are unwilling to start treatment, or are ineligible for treatment because of the high toxicity and low efficacy of interferon and ribavirin-based therapy. Clinical studies with sofosbuvir have demonstrated significant improvement over the prior standard of care, thus ushering in a new paradigm of HCV treatment and an update of treatment guidelines.     

Effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of interventions targeting harm reduction and chronic hepatitis C cascade of care in people who inject drugs: The case of France

Direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs) represent an opportunity to improve hepatitis C virus (HCV) care cascade. This combined with improved harm reduction interventions may lead to HCV elimination especially in people who inject drugs (PWID). We assessed the effectiveness/cost‐effectiveness of improvements in harm reduction and chronic hepatitis C (CHC) care cascade in PWID in France. We used a dynamic model of HCV transmission and CHC natural history and evaluated the following: improved needle/syringe programmes‐opioid substitution therapies, faster diagnosis/linkage to care, earlier treatment initiation, alone and in combination among active PWID (mean age = 36). Outcomes were as follows: life expectancy in discounted quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs); direct lifetime discounted costs; incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER); number of infections/reinfections. Under the current practice, life expectancy was 15.846 QALYs, for a mean lifetime cost of €20 762. Treatment initiation at F0 fibrosis stage alone was less effective and more costly than faster diagnosis/linkage to care combined with treatment initiation at F0, which increased life expectancy to 16.694 QALYs, decreased new infections by 37%, with a ICER = €5300/QALY. Combining these interventions with harm reduction improvements was the most effective scenario (life expectancy = 16.701 QALYs, 41% decrease in new infections) but was not cost‐effective (ICER = €105 600/QALY); it became cost‐effective with higher initial HCV incidence rates and lower harm reduction coverage than in our base‐case scenario. This study illustrated the high effectiveness, and cost‐effectiveness, of a faster diagnosis/linkage to care together with treatment from F0 with DAAs. This “Test and treat” strategy should play a central role both in improving the life expectancies of HCV‐infected patients, and in reducing HCV transmission.     

Sofosbuvir‐Daclatasvir is suboptimal in patients with genotype 2 chronic hepatitis C infection: real‐life experience from the HEPATHER ANRS CO22 cohort

Sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir with or without ribavirin has demonstrated a high efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in clinical trials of patients infected with genotype 2 hepatitis Cvirus (HCV); however, there are currently no real‐world data available for this regimen. To evaluate the real‐life safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir/daclatasvir with or without ribavirin in genotype 2 HCV patients in the French cohort ANRS CO22 HEPATHER(NCT01953458). In this ongoing, national, multicentre, prospective, observational study, we observed patients with HCV genotype 2 infection who initiated treatment with sofosbuvir (400 mg/d) plus daclatasvir with or without ribavirin (1‐1.2 g/d). Patients were divided into two treatment groups: sofosbuvir/daclatasvir with or without ribavirin (12 weeks/24 weeks). The primary end point was a sustained virological response at week 12 following the end of therapy. Overall, 88% and 91% of patients achieved a sustained virological response following 12 and 24 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir/daclatasvir with or without ribavirin, respectively. The most common adverse events were asthenia (29%), headache (15%) and fatigue (20%), and ribavirin addition was associated with a higher rate of adverse events and treatment discontinuation. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir with or without ribavirin was associated with lower rates of sustained virological response in the real‐life setting compared with the clinical setting and demonstrated suboptimal efficacy for the treatment of patients with genotype 2 chronic HCV.     

Cost‐effectiveness analysis of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in patients with chronic hepatitis C: Treatment of patients with absence or mild fibrosis compared to patients with advanced fibrosis

To evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) in treatment‐naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) genotype 1 (GT1) in the absence or mild fibrosis (F0‐F1) versus advanced fibrosis (F2‐F4), from the perspective of the Spanish Health System. A Markov model was developed to simulate disease progression, estimating costs and outcomes [life years gained (LYG) and quality‐adjusted life years (QALY)] derived from starting with LDV/SOF in patients with F0‐F1 compared with F2‐F4. Therapy duration was 8 weeks in noncirrhotic patients with viral load <6 million IU/mL and 12 weeks in the remaining patients. Sustained virologic response rates were obtained from real‐world cohort studies. Transition probabilities, utilities and direct costs were obtained from the literature. A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were performed. LDV/SOF in F0‐F1 patients was a dominant strategy, being more effective (19.85 LYG and 19.80 QALY) than beginning treatment in F2‐F4 patients (18.63 LYG and 16.25 QALY), generating savings of €9228 per patient (€3661 due to disease management and monitoring). In a cohort of 1000 patients, LDV/SOF in F0‐F1 patients decreased the number of cases of decompensated cirrhosis (93%), hepatocellular carcinoma (97%) and liver‐related deaths (95%) and prevented 6 liver transplants compared to initiating LDV/SOF in F2‐F4 patients. In CHC treatment‐naïve GT1 patients, starting treatment with LDV/SOF in patients with F0‐F1 compared to those with F2‐F4 increases effectiveness by 1.22 LYG and 3.55 QALY gained and reduces disease burden and it is associated with cost savings.     

Combination treatment with sofosbuvir and ribavirin for patients diagnosed with hepatitis C genotype 2: A real-world,single-center study

Background and study aimsThe demand for treatments for viral hepatitis using direct antiviral agents (DAAs) has increased; however, few real-world clinical studies are available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir combined with ribavirin for patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) genotype 2 (GT2).Patients and methodsA total of 106 consecutive CHC GT2 patients treated with sofosbuvir plus ribavirin between May 2016 and August 2018 (median age: 52.5 years, male: 51 [48.1%], treatment-naïve patients: 98 [92.5%]) were analyzed. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR12). The secondary endpoint was the occurrence of side effects during treatment.ResultsOf a total of 106 patients with CHC GT2, 103 were genotype 2a (97.2%), and 3 were 2b (2.8%). SVR12 was confirmed in 105 of 106 patients (99.1%). The one patient with treatment failure had combined liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Twenty-five patients had liver cirrhosis in addition to hepatitis C virus (HCV) (Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP)-A, n = 24; C, n = 1), and SVR12 was confirmed in 24 of these patients (96.0%). The mean HCV RNA titer was 2,629,159 IU/ml. Reductions in haemoglobin levels occurred in 23 patients during treatment (3.0 mg/dL, mean), and consequently, ribavirin dose reduction was required (365.2 mg, mean).ConclusionSofosbuvir plus ribavirin was highly effective for the treatment of patients with CHC GT2 and had no serious, treatment-related adverse effects.     

Effect of Somatostatin on Bethanechol-Stimulated Gastric Acid Secretion and Gastric Antral Motility in Dogs with Gastric Fistula

Abstract

Objective. Sofosbuvir and simeprevir in combination with standard therapy are now available for the treatment of patients chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1. With boceprevir and telaprevir, four treatment options are, therefore, now available to clinicians. Phase 3 studies conducted with simeprevir and sofosbuvir compared sustained virological response (SVR) data with those obtained with standard combination therapy and did not include a control arm. It is important to quantify the contribution of these molecules compared to the first direct antiviral agents available. Material and methods. For HCV genotype 1 patients, we performed a literature review and compared all SVR data from phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled trials conducted with these four molecules according to virological characteristics (genotype, viral load) and patient characteristics (IL28B polymorphism, stage of fibrosis). Results. Simeprevir and sofosbuvir provide a net gain in terms of SVR compared to boceprevir and telaprevir except in the case of telaprevir for treatment-naïve HCV genotype 1b patients. Sofosbuvir achieves higher SVR rates than simeprevir except for treatment-naïve IL28B CC patients and naïve HCV genotype 1b patient. Further, simeprevir moderately improve SVR rates compared to telaprevir in treatment-naïve patients with F3–F4 fibrosis and with HCV genotype 1a infection. Conclusion. Sofosbuvir and simeprevir greatly improve the virological response rate compared to first-generation protease inhibitors. All of these data may help in guiding the physician’s treatment decisions, based on financial constraints and patient characteristics. These data can be easily updated with future treatment and demonstrate the contribution of new treatment regimens to achieve optimal SVR rates.     

Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin in Japanese patients with chronic genotype 2 HCV infection: an open‐label,phase 3 trial

Genotype 2 hepatitis C virus (HCV) accounts for up to 30% of chronic HCV infections in Japan. The standard of care for patients with genotype 2 HCV – peginterferon and ribavirin for 24 weeks – is poorly tolerated, especially among older patients and those with advanced liver disease. We conducted a phase 3, open‐label study to assess the efficacy and safety of an all‐oral combination of the NS5B polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and ribavirin in patients with chronic genotype 2 HCV infection in Japan. We enrolled 90 treatment‐naïve and 63 previously treated patients at 20 sites in Japan. All patients received sofosbuvir 400 mg plus ribavirin (weight‐based dosing) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after therapy (SVR12). Of the 153 patients enrolled and treated, 60% had HCV genotype 2a, 11% had cirrhosis, and 22% were over the aged 65 or older. Overall, 148 patients (97%) achieved SVR12. Of the 90 treatment‐naïve patients, 88 (98%) achieved SVR12, and of the 63 previously treated patients, 60 (95%) achieved SVR12. The rate of SVR12 was 94% in patients with cirrhosis and in those aged 65 and older. No patients discontinued study treatment due to adverse events. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis, anaemia and headache. Twelve weeks of sofosbuvir and ribavirin resulted in high rates of SVR12 in treatment‐naïve and previously treated patients with chronic genotype 2 HCV infection. The treatment was safe and well tolerated by patients, including the elderly and those with cirrhosis.     

Deferred treatment with a fixed‐dose combination of sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir for chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1, 2, 4 and 6 infection

Sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir is approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. In this single‐arm, open‐label, phase 3, deferred treatment study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir among patients randomized to the placebo group in the ASTRAL‐1 study. Patients received sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir (400/100 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with sustained virologic response 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). The primary safety endpoint was any adverse events (AEs) leading to the permanent discontinuation of study drug. Overall, 108/111 (97%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 92%‐99%) achieved SVR12, and only one patient had virological failure. SVR12 was achieved by 61/63 (97%, 95%CI, 89%‐100%) genotype 1 patients, 20/20 (100%; 95%CI, 83%‐100%) with genotype 2, 19/19 (100%; 95%CI, 82%‐100%) with genotype 4 and 8/9 (89%; 95% CI, 52%‐100%) with genotype 6. All (19/19; 95%CI, 82‐100) patients with cirrhosis and all (31/31, 95%CI, 89‐100) with prior treatment experience achieved SVR12. The safety profile during treatment was similar to that observed in patients receiving placebo treatment. The most common AEs were headache, fatigue and nausea. One patient (1%) discontinued treatment due to an AE of gallbladder carcinoma, which was not considered related to treatment. Of five reported serious AEs, none were considered related to study drug. Sofosbuvir‐velpatasvir for 12 weeks was effective and well tolerated among untreated and previously treated patients with HCV genotype 1, 2, 4 or 6 infection, including those with compensated cirrhosis (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02346721).     

Sofosbuvir plus ribavirin in treatment‐naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 or 3 infection in India

Until 2014, pegylated interferon plus ribavirin was the recommended standard of care for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in India. This open‐label phase 3b study, conducted across 14 sites in India between 31 March 2014 and 30 November 2015, evaluated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir plus ribavirin therapy among treatment‐naïve patients with chronic genotype 1 or 3 HCV infection. A total of 117 patients with genotype 1 or 3 HCV infection were randomized 1:1 to receive sofosbuvir 400 mg and weight‐based ribavirin (1000 or 1200 mg) daily for 16 or 24 weeks. Among those with genotype 1 infection, the primary efficacy endpoint of sustained virologic response at 12 weeks post‐treatment (SVR12) was reported in 90% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 73‐98) and 96% (95% CI, 82‐100) of patients following 16 and 24 weeks of treatment, respectively. For patients with genotype 3 infection, SVR12 rates were 100% (95% CI, 88‐100) and 93% (95% CI, 78‐99) after 16 and 24 weeks of therapy, respectively. Adverse events, most of which were mild or moderate in severity, occurred in 69% and 57% of patients receiving 16 and 24 weeks of treatment, respectively. The most common treatment‐emergent adverse events were asthenia, headache and cough. Only one patient in the 24‐week group discontinued treatment with sofosbuvir during this study. Overall, sofosbuvir plus ribavirin therapy achieved SVR12 rates ≥90% and was well tolerated among treatment‐naïve patients with chronic genotype 1 or 3 HCV infection in India.     

Sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for the treatment of hepatitis C

Introduction: Direct acting antivirals are revolutionizing the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. Specifically, the combination therapy sofosbuvir and velpatasvir offers a pangenotypic regimen with high sustained viral response (SVR).

Areas covered: Reviewed here are the clinical trials that led to the FDA approval of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir combination therapy, the adverse events during registration trials, and drug-drug interactions. Sofosbuvir and velpatasvir is a fixed dose regimen that is both interferon- and ribavirin-free. It is administered for 12 weeks as a once-a-day pill, covers all genotypes of hepatitis C, and achieves SVR >95% in non-cirrhotic patients and patients with compensated cirrhosis. Addition of ribavirin is recommended for patients with decompensated cirrhosis (CTP B or C). Baseline resistance-associated substitutions do not appear to impair ability to achieve SVR with an initial course of treatment.

Expert commentary: Availability of this highly efficacious, well tolerated, all oral regimen formulated as a single pill, can potentially simplify hepatitis C treatment. Its utility as a pangenotypic regimen additionally limits resource utilization.     

The cost of treatment failure: resource use and costs incurred by hepatitis C virus genotype 1–infected patients who do or do not achieve sustained virological response to therapy

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection places a considerable economic burden on health services. Cost‐effectiveness analyses of antiviral treatment for patients with chronic HCV infection are dependent on assumptions about cost reductions following sustained virological response (SVR) to therapy. This study quantified the medium‐term difference in health resource usage and costs depending on treatment outcome. Retrospective chart review of patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had received at least 2 months pegylated interferon and ribavirin therapy, with known treatment outcome was conducted. Disease status was categorized as chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis or decompensated liver disease. Health resource use was documented for each patient in each disease state. Unit costs were from the NHS ‘Payment by Results’ database and the British National Formulary. One hundred and ninety three patients (108 SVR, 85 non‐SVR) with mean follow‐up of 3.5 (SVR) and 4.9 (non‐SVR) years were enrolled. No SVR patient progressed to a more severe liver disease state. Annual transition rates for non‐SVR patients were 7.4% (chronic hepatitis to cirrhosis) and 4.9% (cirrhosis to decompensated liver disease). By extrapolation of modelled data over a 5‐year post‐treatment period, failure of patients with chronic hepatitis to achieve SVR was associated with a 13‐fold increase (roughly £2300) in costs, whilst for patients who were retreated, the increase was 56‐fold, equating to more than £10 000. Achievement of an SVR has significant effects on health service usage and costs. This work provides real‐life data for future cost‐effectiveness analyses related to the treatment for chronic HCV infection.     

Treatment of DAA-Experienced Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C

Purpose of Review

The development of interferon-free direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (HCV) has significantly improved rates of sustained virologic response (SVR), shortened treatment duration, and improved drug tolerability across genotypes. While SVR rates now exceed 95% among treatment-naïve patients, there are a growing number of patients who have experienced DAA treatment failure and represent an emerging clinical challenge. This review discusses recent data on sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for the treatment of DAA-experienced patients, as well as updated American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases/Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines.

Recent Findings

Data from phase 3 randomized clinical trials show that retreatment of DAA failures is successful in >?90% of patients using the above three regimens. The preferred retreatment regimen is dependent on HCV genotype, possible drug-drug interactions, prior treatment experience, and host factors such as the presence of cirrhosis and renal failure. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir is a reasonable option for DAA-experienced genotype 1b and genotype 2 patients, but has been shown to be inferior to sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in genotype 1a and genotype 3 patients. Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir is a very attractive option for treatment of DAA-experienced genotype 1 and 2 patients, but it is not approved for treatment of DAA-experienced patients with genotype 3, and data is lacking to support its use in DAA treatment-experienced patients with genotypes 4–6.

Summary

The potency and high barrier to resistance of newer DAA regimens create an opportunity to cure most people with chronic hepatitis C, regardless of prior treatment failures. It is now possible to consider elimination of hepatitis C; the remaining barriers are the cost of therapy and access to care.

     

Direct costs of interferon‐based and interferon‐free direct‐acting antiviral regimens for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C infection

Given the increasing budget impact of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment, robust real‐world cost data are essential for healthcare decision‐makers to evaluate and understand the costs and benefits of these treatments. To determine the direct cost of treating HCV infection in a hospital‐based ambulatory care setting in Ireland based on available data from the Irish national hepatitis C treatment registry. A microcosting study of the direct costs of patients with hepatitis C treated with interferon‐based and interferon‐free direct‐acting antiviral regimens was conducted. Attendance at the outpatient clinic for clinical assessment, the quantity of resources used per patient, the medication prescribed and the identification and timing of staff involvement was measured and combined to establish a mean cost of treatment per patient and a cost per sustained virological response (SVR). One hundred and sixty‐eight patients were included in the analysis; 119 treated with interferon‐based direct‐acting antiviral regimens and 47 treated with interferon‐free regimens. The mean costs of treatment with the interferon‐based regimens per patient were €38 286 (95% CI €35 305–€41 061). The cost per SVR was €62 457. The mean cost of treatment with interferon‐free regimens per patient was €55 734 (95% CI €50 906–€60 880). The cost per SVR was €81 873. Real‐world cost data provide valuable information to enhance reimbursement decisions. While the direct costs associated with hepatitis C treatment in Ireland are substantial, it is reasonable to expect that the mean cost of treatment and the cost per SVR will reduce as patients with less advanced disease are treated with interferon‐free therapies.     

All‐oral,interferon‐free treatment for chronic hepatitis C: cost‐effectiveness analyses

Interferon‐based standard of care treatments (SOC) for chronic hepatitis C are unable to provide high cure rates in certain subgroups of the infected population and can cause debilitating side effects. Clinical trials evaluating all‐oral, interferon‐free treatments have demonstrated high rates of sustained virologic response with no resistance or major adverse events in most populations. As these drug regimens move towards FDA approval, it will be important to assess their cost‐effectiveness in addition to their clinical efficacy. A decision‐analytic Markov model with a lifetime, societal perspective was used to evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of a generalized all‐oral drug regimen compared to SOC by modelling the progression of a 50‐year‐old, HCV‐positive cohort through disease natural history and treatment. In base case analysis, all‐oral treatment dominated SOC across a range of willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) thresholds with an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$44 514/quality‐adjusted life year (QALY). In sensitivity analyses, the model was sensitive to all‐oral drug costs as well as rates of SVR and treatment uptake among noncirrhotic subjects, but robust to variations in all other parameters. All‐oral treatment was most cost‐effective among genotype 1 subjects but remained cost‐effective for genotypes 2 and 3 at WTP thresholds ≥$80 000/QALY. Quality‐adjusted life years gained per dollar spent were maximized in younger treatment cohorts. Using this model, the degree of cost‐effectiveness depended on the WTP threshold and the final cost set for approved drug combinations.     

Treatment outcomes and costs of a simplified antiviral treatment strategy for hepatitis C among monoinfected and HIV and/or hepatitis B virus‐co‐infected patients in Myanmar

Access to hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment is limited in Myanmar. We assessed an integrated HIV and viral hepatitis testing and HCV treatment strategy. Sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) ± weight‐based ribavirin for 12 weeks was provided at three treatment sites in Myanmar and sustained virologic response (SVR) assessed at 12 weeks after treatment. Participants co‐infected with HBV were treated concurrently with tenofovir. Cost estimates in 2018 USD were made at Yangon and Mandalay using standard micro‐costing methods. 803 participants initiated SOF/VEL; 4.8% were lost to follow‐up. SVR was achieved in 680/803 (84.6%) by intention‐to‐treat analysis. SVR amongst people who inject drugs (PWID) was 79.7% (381/497), but 92.5% among PWID on opioid substitution therapy (OST) (74/80), and 97.4% among non‐PWID (298/306). Utilizing data from 492 participants, of whom 93% achieved SVR, the estimated average cost of treatment per patient initiated was $1030 (of which 54% were medication costs), with a production cost per successful outcome (SVR) of $1109 and real‐world estimate of $1250. High SVR rates were achieved for non‐PWID and PWID on OST. However, the estimated average cost of the intervention (under the assumption of no genotype testing and reduced real‐world effectiveness) of $1250/patient is unaffordable for a national elimination strategy. Reductions in the cost of antivirals and linkage to social and behavioural health services including substance use disorder treatment to increase retention and adherence to treatment are critical to HCV elimination in this population.     

Community‐based real‐world treatment outcomes of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir in Asians with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 6 in the United States

Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF/LDV) is the first all‐oral ribavirin‐free treatment approved for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 6, offering a safe and highly efficacious treatment option. Large studies evaluating real‐world outcomes of this regimen are lacking. We aim to evaluate real‐world treatment outcomes for HCV genotype 6. A retrospective cohort study evaluated 65 adults (age ≥18) with chronic HCV genotype 6 treated with SOF/LDV without ribavirin at a community gastroenterology clinic in the United States from November 2014 to May 2016. Rates of undetectable virus at week 4 on treatment, at end of treatment (EOT) and SVR12 were stratified by the presence of cirrhosis and prior treatment (treatment naïve vs treatment experienced). Among 65 patients with chronic HCV genotype 6 treated with SOF/LDV (52.3% male, mean age 66.3 years [SD 9.7], 41.5% cirrhosis and 15.4% treatment experienced), 97.3% had undetectable virus at week 4 on treatment, 96.9% had undetectable virus at EOT and 95.3% achieved SVR12. SVR12 was 100% in females vs 91.2% in males, P=.096, and 92.3% in patients with cirrhosis vs 97.4% in those without cirrhosis, P=.347. Resistance testing of treatment failures was attempted but unsuccessful due to lack of conforming primers to define the possible resistance mutations. Among the largest U.S. community‐based real‐world cohort of Asian chronic HCV genotype 6 patients treated with all‐oral SOF/LDV without ribavirin, SVR12 was similar to SVR12 reported in clinical trials, confirming the safety and effectiveness of this regimen and validating current HCV genotype 6 treatment guideline recommendations.     

Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir in patients with chronic HCV genotype 3 infection: An integrated phase 2/3 analysis

Glecaprevir coformulated with pibrentasvir (G/P) is approved to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and was highly efficacious in phase 2 and 3 studies. Treating HCV genotype (GT) 3 infection remains a priority, as these patients are harder to cure and at a greater risk for liver steatosis, fibrosis progression and hepatocellular carcinoma. Data were pooled from five phase 2 or 3 trials that evaluated 8‐, 12‐ and 16‐week G/P in patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection. Patients without cirrhosis or with compensated cirrhosis were either treatment‐naïve or experienced with interferon‐ or sofosbuvir‐based regimens. Safety and sustained virologic response 12 weeks post‐treatment (SVR12) were assessed. The analysis included 693 patients with GT3 infection. SVR12 was achieved by 95% of treatment‐naïve patients without cirrhosis receiving 8‐week (198/208) and 12‐week (280/294) G/P. Treatment‐naïve patients with cirrhosis had a 97% (67/69) SVR12 rate with 12‐week G/P. Treatment‐experienced, noncirrhotic patients had SVR12 rates of 90% (44/49) and 95% (21/22) with 12‐ and 16‐week G/P, respectively; 94% (48/51) of treatment‐experienced patients with cirrhosis treated for 16 weeks achieved SVR12. No serious adverse events (AEs) were attributed to G/P; AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were rare (<1%). G/P was well‐tolerated and efficacious for patients with chronic HCV GT3 infection, regardless of cirrhosis status or prior treatment experience. Eight‐ and 12‐week durations were efficacious for treatment‐naïve patients without cirrhosis and with compensated cirrhosis, respectively; 16‐week G/P was efficacious in patients with prior treatment experience irrespective of cirrhosis status.     

Safety and efficacy of coblopasvir and sofosbuvir in patients with genotypes 1, 2, 3 and 6 HCV infections without or with compensated cirrhosis

A simple, pangenotypic and effective treatment regimen for patients with a broad range of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections remains an unmet medical need. We conducted a phase 2, randomized, open study involving untreated patients with chronic HCV genotypes 1, 2, 3, or 6 infections. Patients without cirrhosis were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio to receive capsules of the NS5A inhibitor coblopasvir at a dose of 30 or 60 mg plus tablets of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir (400 mg) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients with cirrhosis received 60 mg coblopasvir plus sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy (SVR12). Of the 110 patients who were enrolled in the study, 59 were male, 62.7% had HCV genotype 1, 24.5% had genotype 2, 6.4% had genotype 3, and 6.4% had genotype 6. The average age was 45.5 years. A total of 10.9% of patients had compensated cirrhosis. The rate of SVR12 was 98.2% in the intention‐to‐treat (ITT). One genotype 6 patient with cirrhosis experienced virologic relapse. One genotype 2 patient without cirrhosis failed to complete the follow‐up and quit the study. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 2 patients and were not related to coblopasvir and sofosbuvir. Most adverse events (AEs) did not require treatment. Coblopasvir plus sofosbuvir taken once daily for 12 weeks provided high rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) and had a good safety profile among patients with HCV genotypes 1, 2, 3, or 6 infections, including those with compensated cirrhosis.