VOL. 6 • NO. 9 • SEPTEMBER 2012
GI& HEPATOLOGY NEWS
Adding Telaprevir to HCV Regimen Worthwhile
BY DIANA MAHONEY
IMNG Medical News
SAN DIEGO
"When considered in the context of the improved SVR, “the burden of the increased incidence of anemia and rash associated with telaprevir, of which few cases are severe, appears to be outweighed by the overall treatment response.”
Addition of telaprevir to
peginterferon/ribavirin therapy for
chronic hepatitis C can exacerbate treatment-
related side effects, but the triple
combination does not diminish patient
quality of life relative to the peginterferon/
ribavirin regimen alone, a study
has shown."
Adding the protease inhibitor telaprevir
“does not further diminish patient
quality of life,” lead investigator Dr.
Zobair Younossi, AGAF, explained at the
annual Digestive Disease Week.
“The most important contributor to
the quality of life measurement in interferon
therapy is interferon itself, which
is so overwhelming in terms of side effects,
especially grade 4 and 5 effects, that
it probably overshadows everything
else.
”
Studies have shown that addition of
telaprevir to standard peginterferon alfa-
2a/ribavirin (PR) significantly improves
treatment efficacy in treatment-naive patients
with genotype 1 hepatitis C virus
(HCV), but there is a perception that the
additional side effect burden from
telaprevir is prohibitive in some patients,
said Dr. Younossi, chairman of the department
of medicine at Inova Health
System in Falls Church, Va.
Dr. Younossi and colleagues conducted
post hoc analyses of data from the
ADVANCE trial, in which adding telaprevir
to the treatment mix significantly
improved patients’ sustained virologic
response compared with standard PR
therapy.
In the ADVANCE study, 1,088 treatment-
naive HCV genotype 1 patients
were assigned to one of three treatment
arms: 48 weeks of standard PR
therapy; 12 weeks of telaprevir plus 24
weeks PR; or 12 weeks of telaprevir plus
48 weeks of PR.
Nearly 80% of patients
in both telaprevir groups achieved
sustained virologic response, compared
with 46% of patients in the standard PR
treatment group (N. Engl. J. Med. 2011;
364:2405-16).
In terms of side effects, “across all
phase III studies, the incidence of rash
and anemia (which are the effects we’re
talking about with the protease inhibitors)
was 56% and 34%, respectively,
among telaprevir-treated patients, and
36% and 17% in patients receiving standard
treatment,” Dr. Younossi said.
To assess whether and to what degree
these increases played a role in patient
quality of life, Dr. Younossi and colleagues
analyzed the results of EQ-5D
quality of life questionnaires completed
at baseline and at weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48,
and 72 by 722 patients.
The investigators derived a summary
index by calculating the percentages of
patients reporting problems for each of
the five health-related quality of life dimensions
measured (mobility, self-care,
usual activities, pain/discomfort, and
anxiety/depression).
After adjustment for age and sex, the
baseline mean index values for the EQ-
5D were 0.92 for the telaprevir plus 24-
week PR group, 0.90 for the telaprevir
plus 48-week PR group, and 0.91 for the
48-week PR-only group.
The percentages of patients reporting
any problems in each of the five qualitative
dimensions at baseline were 8.2%
for mobility, 2.0% for self-care, 12.9% for
usual activities, 25.7% for pain/discomfort,
and 25.6% for anxiety/depression,
he said.
Across all the treatment groups, the
EQ-5D index scores worsened during
the first 12 weeks of treatment initiation.
Specifically, mean values were 0.80 for
the pooled-telaprevir groups and 0.83
for the PR-only group, according to Dr.
Younossi.
Also, the respective percentages of patients
in the pooled-telaprevir and PR-only
groups reporting any problems at week
12 were 56% and 50% for usual activities,
51% and 42% for anxiety/depression, and
60% and 63% for pain/discomfort, he
said.
Change from baseline in terms of reported
impact on mobility and self-care
were small and not reported.
At week 48, the corresponding mean
EQ-5D values were 0.93 for the telaprevir
plus 24-week PR group, 0.83 for the
telaprevir plus 48-week PR group, and
0.84 for the PR-only group.
By week 72 the EQ-5D index values returned
to baseline levels, Dr. Younossi
said.
Adjusted for age and sex, the mean
EQ-5D index at week 72 was higher
among the patients achieving sustained
virologic response (SVR) compared with
those who did not, with respective values
of 0.90 and 0.86. “The 4% difference
is within the range of published values
for the minimal clinically important difference
for the EQ-5D,” he said.
Furthermore, at week 72, there were
fewer patients among those who experienced
SVR and reported problems in
each dimension, compared with those
who did not experience SVR.
At week 72, after adjustment for the index
at baseline, patient age, sex, race, advanced
liver disease, self-reported
comorbidities, and the number of adverse
events during treatment, only SVR
was a positive predictor of the EQ-5D index.
“We saw that [SVR] was a statistically
significant and meaningful
predictor of health-related quality of
life,” he said.
The study findings are consistent with
the published research on the impacts of
interferon-based regimens on health-related
quality of life in this patient population,
“and support the value of shorter
treatment duration and [SVR] from a patient-
reported outcomes perspective,”
said Dr. Younossi.
“We certainly cannot say that adding
telaprevir causes fewer side effects.
It’s
clear there are more side effects, but it appears
that the most troublesome side effects
are related to the interferon
therapy,” he explained.
When considered in the context of
the improved SVR, “the burden of the increased
incidence of anemia and rash associated
with telaprevir, of which few
cases are severe, appears to be outweighed
by the overall treatment response.”
This study was sponsored by Vertex.
Dr. Younossi disclosed relationships with
Biolex, Vertex, Salix, GlaxoSmithKline,
and Tibotec.
GI & Hepatology News is the official newspaper of the AGA Institute and provides the gastroenterologist with timely and relevant news and commentary about clinical developments and about the impact of health-care policy. The newspaper is led by an internationally renowned board of editors.
Download PDF
This blog is all about current FDA approved drugs to treat the hepatitis C virus (HCV) with a focus on treating HCV according to genotype, using information extracted from peer-reviewed journals, liver meetings/conferences, and interactive learning activities.
Risk Of Developing Liver Cancer After HCV Treatment
- Home
- Newly Diagnosed With Hep C? Or Considering Treatment?
- All FDA Approved Drugs To Treat Hepatitis C
- Hepatitis C Genotypes and Treatment
- Mavyret (glecaprevir/pibrentasvir)
- Vosevi (Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir/Voxilaprevir)
- Epclusa® (Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir)
- Harvoni® (Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir)
- VIEKIRA XR/VIEKIRA Pak
- Zepatier(Elbasvir/Grazoprevir)
- Cure - Achieving sustained virologic response (SVR) in hepatitis C
- HCV Liver Fibrosis
- FibroScan® Understanding The Results
- HCV Cirrhosis
- Staging Cirrhosis
- HCV Liver Cancer
- Risk Of Developing Liver Cancer After HCV Treatment
- Treating Elderly HCV Patients
- Fatty Liver Disease: NAFLD/NASH
- Current research articles on ailments that may be related to HCV
- Is There A Natural Way To Improve Liver Fibrosis?
- Can Food Or Herbs Interact With Conventional Medical Treatments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment