18 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Peginterferon Alfa-2b or Alfa-2a with Ribavirin for Treatment of Hepatitis C Infection
Background
Treatment guidelines recommend the use of peginterferon alfa-2b or peginterferon alfa-2a in combination with ribavirin for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. However, these regimens have not been adequately compared.
Methods
At 118 sites, patients who had HCV genotype 1 infection and who had not previously been treated were randomly assigned to undergo 48 weeks of treatment with one of three regimens: peginterferon alfa-2b at a standard dose of 1.5 μg per kilogram of body weight per week or a low dose of 1.0 μg per kilogram per week, plus ribavirin at a dose of 800 to 1400 mg per day, or peginterferon alfa-2a at a dose of 180 μg per week plus ribavirin at a dose of 1000 to 1200 mg per day. We compared the rate of sustained virologic response and the safety and adverse-event profiles between the peginterferon alfa-2b regimens and between the standard-dose peginterferon alfa- 2b regimen and the peginterferon alfa-2a regimen.
Results
Among 3070 patients, rates of sustained virologic response were similar among the regimens: 39.8% with standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, 38.0% with low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, and 40.9% with peginterferon alfa-2a (P=0.20 for standarddose vs. low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b; P=0.57 for standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b vs. peginterferon alfa-2a). Estimated differences in response rates were 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], −2.3 to 6.0) between standard-dose and low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b and −1.1% (95% CI, −5.3 to 3.0) between standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b and peginterferon alfa-2a. Relapse rates were 23.5% (95% CI, 19.9 to 27.2) for standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, 20.0% (95% CI, 16.4 to 23.6) for lowdose peginterferon alfa-2b, and 31.5% (95% CI, 27.9 to 35.2) for peginterferon alfa- 2a. The safety profile was similar among the three groups; serious adverse events were observed in 8.6 to 11.7% of patients. Among the patients with undetectable HCV RNA levels at treatment weeks 4 and 12, a sustained virologic response was achieved in 86.2% and 78.7%, respectively.
Conclusions
In patients infected with HCV genotype 1, the rates of sustained virologic response and tolerability did not differ significantly between the two available peginterferon– ribavirin regimens or between the two doses of peginterferon alfa-2b. (ClinicalTrials. gov number, NCT00081770.
Recommended from our members
Longitudinal correlations between MRE, MRI-PDFF, and liver histology in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: Analysis of data from a phase II trial of selonsertib.
Background & aimsNon-invasive tools for monitoring treatment response and disease progression in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are needed. Our objective was to evaluate the utility of magnetic resonance (MR)-based hepatic imaging measures for the assessment of liver histology in patients with NASH.MethodsWe analyzed data from patients with NASH and stage 2 or 3 fibrosis enrolled in a phase II study of selonsertib. Pre- and post-treatment assessments included centrally read MR elastography (MRE)-estimated liver stiffness, MR imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF), and liver biopsies evaluated according to the NASH Clinical Research Network classification and the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score (NAS).ResultsAmong 54 patients with MRE and biopsies at baseline and week 24, 18 (33%) had fibrosis improvement (≥1-stage reduction) after undergoing 24 weeks of treatment with the study drug. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of MRE-stiffness to predict fibrosis improvement was 0.62 (95% CI 0.46-0.78) and the optimal threshold was a ≥0% relative reduction. At this threshold, MRE had 67% sensitivity, 64% specificity, 48% positive predictive value, 79% negative predictive value. Among 65 patients with MRI-PDFF and biopsies at baseline and week 24, a ≥1-grade reduction in steatosis was observed in 18 (28%). The AUROC of MRI-PDFF to predict steatosis response was 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.83) and the optimal threshold was a ≥0% relative reduction. At this threshold, MRI-PDFF had 89% sensitivity and 47% specificity, 39% positive predictive value, and 92% negative predictive value.ConclusionsThese preliminary data support the further evaluation of MRE-stiffness and MRI-PDFF for the longitudinal assessment of histologic response in patients with NASH.Lay summaryLiver biopsy is a potentially painful and risky method to assess damage to the liver due to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We analyzed data from a clinical trial to determine if 2 methods of magnetic resonance imaging - 1 to measure liver fat and 1 to measure liver fibrosis (scarring) - could potentially replace liver biopsy in evaluating NASH-related liver injury. Both imaging methods were correlated with biopsy in showing the effects of NASH on the liver
Recommended from our members
Longitudinal correlations between MRE, MRI-PDFF, and liver histology in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: Analysis of data from a phase II trial of selonsertib.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Non-invasive tools for monitoring treatment response and disease progression in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are needed. Our objective was to evaluate the utility of magnetic resonance (MR)-based hepatic imaging measures for the assessment of liver histology in patients with NASH.
METHODS: We analyzed data from patients with NASH and stage 2 or 3 fibrosis enrolled in a phase II study of selonsertib. Pre- and post-treatment assessments included centrally read MR elastography (MRE)-estimated liver stiffness, MR imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF), and liver biopsies evaluated according to the NASH Clinical Research Network classification and the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score (NAS).
RESULTS: Among 54 patients with MRE and biopsies at baseline and week 24, 18 (33%) had fibrosis improvement (≥1-stage reduction) after undergoing 24 weeks of treatment with the study drug. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of MRE-stiffness to predict fibrosis improvement was 0.62 (95% CI 0.46-0.78) and the optimal threshold was a ≥0% relative reduction. At this threshold, MRE had 67% sensitivity, 64% specificity, 48% positive predictive value, 79% negative predictive value. Among 65 patients with MRI-PDFF and biopsies at baseline and week 24, a ≥1-grade reduction in steatosis was observed in 18 (28%). The AUROC of MRI-PDFF to predict steatosis response was 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.83) and the optimal threshold was a ≥0% relative reduction. At this threshold, MRI-PDFF had 89% sensitivity and 47% specificity, 39% positive predictive value, and 92% negative predictive value.
CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary data support the further evaluation of MRE-stiffness and MRI-PDFF for the longitudinal assessment of histologic response in patients with NASH.
LAY SUMMARY: Liver biopsy is a potentially painful and risky method to assess damage to the liver due to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We analyzed data from a clinical trial to determine if 2 methods of magnetic resonance imaging - 1 to measure liver fat and 1 to measure liver fibrosis (scarring) - could potentially replace liver biopsy in evaluating NASH-related liver injury. Both imaging methods were correlated with biopsy in showing the effects of NASH on the liver
Simtuzumab Is Ineffective for Patients With Bridging Fibrosis or Compensated Cirrhosis Caused by Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis.
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Lysyl oxidase-like 2 contributes to fibrogenesis by catalyzing cross-linkage of collagen. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of simtuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against lysyl oxidase-like 2, in two phase 2b trials of patients with advanced fibrosis caused by nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
METHODS
We performed a double-blind study of 219 patients with bridging fibrosis caused by nonalcoholic steatohepatitis who were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups given weekly subcutaneous injections of simtuzumab (75 or 125 mg) or placebo for a planned duration of 240 weeks. We performed a separate study of 258 patients with compensated cirrhosis randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups given intravenous infusions of simtuzumab (200 or 700 mg) or placebo every other week. The studies were performed from January 2013 through July 2014 at 80 sites in North America and Europe. Biopsy specimens were collected and analyzed at screening and at weeks 48 and 96; clinical information and serum levels of fibrosis biomarkers were collected throughout the study. The primary end point was change from baseline to week 96 in hepatic collagen content, measured by morphometry of liver specimens, in patients with bridging fibrosis; for patients with cirrhosis, the primary end point was change in hepatic venous pressure gradient from baseline to week 96.
RESULTS
The 2 studies were stopped after week 96 because of lack of efficacy. All 3 groups of patients with bridging fibrosis-including those given placebo-had significant decreases in hepatic collagen content, but there was no statistically significant difference in decrease between patients receiving simtuzumab 75 mg and those receiving placebo (-0.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.3 to 1.0, P = .77) or between patients receiving simtuzumab 125 mg and those receiving placebo (-0.4%, 95% CI -1.5 to 0.8, P = .52). In patients with cirrhosis, the mean difference in hepatic venous pressure gradient between the 2 simtuzumab groups and the placebo group was 0.1 mm Hg (95% CI -1.2 to 1.5, P = .84 for 200 mg; 95% CI -1.2 to 1.4, P = .88 for 700 mg). Simtuzumab did not significantly decrease fibrosis stage, progression to cirrhosis in patients with bridging fibrosis, or liver-related clinical events in patients with cirrhosis. Rates of adverse events were similar among groups.
CONCLUSION
In two phase 2b trials of patients with bridging fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis associated with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, simtuzumab was ineffective in decreasing hepatic collagen content or hepatic venous pressure gradient, respectively. Clinicaltrials.govNCT01672866 and NCT01672879