Decline of Prevalence of Resistance Associated Substitutions to NS3 and NS5A inhibitors at DAA-failure in Hepatitis C Virus in Italy over the years 2015 to 2018

Background: A minority of patients fail to eliminate HCV and resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) are commonly detected at failure of interferon-free DAA regimens. Material and methods: Within the Italian network VIRONET-C, the prevalence of NS3/NS5A/NS5B RASs was retrospectively evaluated in patients who failed an EASL recommended DAA-regimen in 2015-2018. NS3, NS5A and NS5B Sanger sequencing was performed using homemade protocols. The geno2pheno system was used to infer HCV-genotype/subtype and predict drug resistance. The changes in the prevalence of RASs over time were evaluated using the chi-square test for trend, predictors of RASs at failure were analysed by logistic regression. Results: We included 386 real-life HCV pts failed to recommended DAA regimens: 92% (271/294) Italians, 75% (286/384) males, median age was 56 years (IQR 52-61); 106 (28%) were treatment-experienced: 91 (86%) with IFN-based treatments, 26 (25%) with DAA-based regimens. Metavir fibrosis stage was F4 in 76% (245/322), 65% (240/369) had clinical cirrhosis. Patients with HIV and HBV coinfection were 10% (33/317) and 8% (6/72), respectively. HCV genotype (G) was G1b in 122 pts (32%), G3a 103 (27%), G1a 97 (25%), G4d 30 (8%), G2c 19 (5%), G3h 5 (1.3%), G4a 4 (1%) and 1 (0.3%) each for G3g, G4n/o/v. DAA regimens were: LDV/SOF in 115 (30%), DCV/SOF in 103 (27%), 3D in 83 (21%), EBR/GRZ in 32 (8%), VEL/SOF in 29 (7%), GLE/PIB in 18 (5%) and 2D in 6 (2%); ribavirin was administered in 123 (32%). Antiviral treatment was completed by 352 pts (91%), while 34 (9%) discontinued prematurely. The NS5A fasta-sequence was available for all pts, NS5B for 361 (94%), NS3 for 365 (95%). The prevalence of any RASs was 87%, namely 78/135 (58%) in NS3, 303/359 (85%) in NS5A, 114/286 (40%) in NS5B (Tab 1). The prevalence of any RASs significantly declined from 2015 to 2018 (100%, 13/13 vs 81%, 101/125, p=0.01): NS5A RASs from 100%, 13/13 to 76%, 76/100 (p<0.001), NS3 RASs from 88%, 7/8 to 44%, 28/63 (p=0.02), while NS5B RASs remained stable. Independent predictors of any RASs included liver cirrhosis/advanced fibrosis (AOR 3.72, CI 95% 1.51-9.17, p=0.004) and genotype (G2 vs G1a AOR 0.01, CI 95% 0.0-0.3, p<0.001; G3 vs G1a AOR 0.22, CI 95% 0.05-0.98, p<0.047; G4 vs G1a AOR 0.13, CI 95% 0.03-0.63, p<0.011), with a modest effect scored for past treatment (AOR 3.45, CI 95% 1.00-11.92, p=0.05), after adjusting for DAA regimen and year of genotype. Notably, full activity was predicted for GLE/PIB in 75.9% of cases and for at least two components of VEL/SOF/VOX in 59% of cases and no case with full-resistance to either regimen was found (Tab 2). Conclusions: Despite decreasing prevalence over the years, RASs remain a common signature at virological failure of DAA treatment, particularly in patients with the highest grade of liver fibrosis. Their distribution may vary according to genotype, so the identification of RASs after failure could play a crucial role in optimizing retreatment strategies

Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir/simeprevir plus flat dose ribavirin in genotype 1 elderly cirrhotic patients: A real-life study

The proportion of HCV-infected patients over age 65 years in Western countries is increasing. This growth and the advent of new antiviral therapy bring into the question the real-world efficacy and safety of the combination of sofosbuvir (SOF) and simeprevir (SMV) plus a flat dose of 800 mg/d ribavirin (RBV) in elderly patients with cirrhosis compared to younger patients

Rate of non-response to ursodeoxycholic acid in a large real-world cohort of primary biliary cholangitis patients in Italy.

Background and aim: Response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is crucial for the prediction of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) prognosis, and different response criteria were validated and proposed by reference centers for PBC. To date, rates of non-response to UDCA from real-world series are lacking.Methods: Hepatology/Gastroenterology centers belonging to 'Club Epatologi Ospedalieri' (CLEO) and 'Associazione Italiana Gastroenterologi Ospedalieri' (AIGO) were invited to participate in the study, and asked to extract all patients followed for PBC, without any selection or exclusion, and fill in the database provided.Results: Thirty-four centers were enrolled throughout Italy, for a total of 713 patients. None of these centers, except one, had a hepatology outpatient clinic devoted to the care of patients with autoimmune liver diseases. After excluding 79 cases of PBC/autoimmune hepatitis overlaps, 634 patients were analyzed: mean age, 64.4 ± 12.0 years; 91.2% females; F/M 10.3/1. For patients with at least 1 year of UDCA treatment (583), rates of non-response to UDCA were evaluated according to the Paris-I/-II, Toronto and GLOBE criteria, and compared with those in the original cohorts: 27% vs 39% in Paris-I cohort; 39.6% vs 52% in Paris-II; 20.1% vs 43.5% in Toronto; 15.7% vs 30% in GLOBE (age-specific cutoffs). Mean alkaline phosphatase levels on UDCA treatment, and the age-adjusted prevalence of F3/F4 fibrosis, appeared lower in this PBC population than in reference cohorts.Conclusions: A mean ∼15% better response to UDCA is observed in a real-world PBC population, probably due to migration of some of most severe/advanced cases to PBC referral centers

Characterization of baseline factors associated with treatment outcome in HCV-infected patients naive to direct acting antivirals: particular focus on natural resistance

This study aimed to evaluate the presence of natural resistance-associated-substitutions (RASs) and other pre-treatment risk-factors for failure in a large group of HCV-infected patients naive to direct-acting-antivirals (DAA) with an available outcome after their first-line NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen in Italy

Characterization of resistance profiles in HCV 2-3-4 DAA-naïve and DAA-experienced infected patients in Italy

Pan-genotypic direct-acting antivirals (DAA) will be the most used regimens. However, their use, in short, ribavirin-free regimens may be affected by the presence of resistance-associated-substitutions (RASs), whose prevalence varies within HCV-genotypes (GTs). This study investigated the resistance profile in HCV 2-3-4 infected, DAA-naïve and DAA-experienced, Italian patients

Resistance test guided retreatment of HCV infected patients with a previous failure to a NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen: the Italian Vironet C real life experience

Previous article in issueNext article in issue Introduction: There is a limited documentation about the retreatment of patients failing a recommended NS5A-containing regimen in Italy. Materials & methods: Within the VIRONET-C network, 386 NS5A-failing patients infected with different HCV-genotypes (GT) (GT1a/1b/2a-c/3a-b-g-h/4a-d-n-o-v=93/124/19/112/38) were analyzed. Retreatment of 105 failures was investigated. HCV-resistance-test was performed by Sanger-sequencing. Results: Failures following seven different NS5A-containing regimens were studied: 3D/2D (paritaprevir/ombitasvir ± dasabuvir) ± ribavirin (N = 72/4), daclatasvir/ledipasvir/velpatasvir + sofosbuvir ± ribavirin (N = 105/131/20), grazoprevir/elbasvir ± ribavirin (N = 34), glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (N = 20). Notably, 18.1% of NS5A-failing patients did not show any resistance-associated-substitutions (RAS), while 81.9% showed at least one NS5A-RAS, with multiclass-resistance in 35.5%. NS5A-RAS were observed more frequently in glecaprevir/pibrentasvir failures (GT1a 83.3%: Y93H + Q30H/D or +H58D; GT3a: 83.3% Y93H + A30K/G or +L31I) compared to sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (GT1a 16.6%: Y93H + Q30H, p = 0.08; GT3a 20.0%: Y93H/N + A30K/T, p = 0.03). To date, 105 failures have started a retreatment: sofosbuvir/velpatasvir ± ribavirin (N = 30), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir ± ribavirin (N = 67), glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (N = 4), grazoprevir/elbasvir ± sofosbuvir + ribavirin (N = 3), 3D + sofosbuvir + ribavirin (N = 1). The majority of patients were cirrhotic (51.9%) and relapsers (87.5%). The prevalence of NS5A-RASs before retreatment was 80.9%, with multiclass-resistance 29.5%. Among patients completing post-retreatment follow-up, a sustained-viral-response at week 12 (SVR12) was observed in 26/33 (78.8%). SVR4 was documented in 49/56 (87.5%). SVR12 was 76.0% with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir ± ribavirin (N = 25). Differently, SVR12 was 100% with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8/12/16 weeks (N = 3), grazoprevir/elbasvir ± sofosbuvir + ribavirin for 12/24 weeks (N = 3) or 3D + sofosbuvir + ribavirin for 24 weeks (N = 1), despite the presence of NS5A-RASs. Until now, 67 patients started sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir ± ribavirin recommended-retreatment for 12 weeks. 54/67 (80.6%) showed at least one baseline NS5A-RAS, 23/67 (34.3%) multiple-NS5A-RASs, and 22/67 (32.8%) multiclass-resistance. Of 25 patients with available outcome, 96.0% had SVR4. Only 1 GT1b infected patient was non-responder, without RASs before retreatment. Conclusions: In this real-life setting, NS5A-RASs were frequently detected at failure, and multiclass-resistance was around 30%. Overall, SVR after resistance-test-guided retreatment was >95%, with the exception of the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir retreatment. Our results show how HCV resistance-test at failure may be useful to optimize retreatment strategies

Resistance analysis and treatment outcomes in hepatitis C virus genotype 3-infected patients within the Italian network VIRONET-C

none76noAim: This study aimed to investigate the role of resistance-associated substitutions (RASs) to direct-acting-antivirals (DAAs) in HCV genotype 3 (GT3). Methods: Within the Italian VIRONET-C network, a total of 539 GT3-infected patients (417 DAA-naïve and 135 DAA-failures, of them, 13 at both baseline and failure) were analysed. Sanger sequencing of NS3/NS5A/NS5B was performed following home-made protocols. Results: The majority of patients were male (79.4%), 91.4% were injection drug users, 49.3% were cirrhotic and 13.9% were HIV co-infected. Phylogenetic analysis classified sequences as GT3a-b-g-h (98%-0.4%-0.2%-1.2%) respectively. Overall, 135 patients failed a DAA regimen: sofosbuvir (SOF)/daclatasvir (DCV) or velpatasvir (VEL)±ribavirin (RBV) (N = 91/15) and glecaprevir (G)/pibrentasvir (P) (N = 9). Moreover, 14.8% of patients were treated with suboptimal regimens for GT3: 3D ± RBV (Paritaprevir/r + Ombitasvir+Dasabuvir, N = 15), SOF + Simeprevir (SIM) (N = 1) or SOF/Ledipasvir (LDV) ± RBV (N = 4). RAS prevalence was 15.8% in DAA-naïve patients. At failure, 81.5% patients showed at least one RAS: 11/25 (44.0%) in NS3, 109/135 (80.7%) in NS5A, 7/111 (6.3%) in NS5B SOF-failures. In NS5A-failures, Y93H RAS was the most prevalent (68.5% vs 5.1% DAA-naïve, P <.001) followed by A30K (12.7% vs 2.8% in DAA-naïve, P <.001). Analysing baseline samples, a higher prevalence of NS5A-RASs was observed before treatment in DAA-failures (5/13, 38.5%) vs DAA-naïves (61/393, 15.5%, P =.04). Regarding 228 DAA-naïve patients with an available outcome, 93.9% achieved a SVR. Interestingly, patients with baseline Y93H and/or A30K had SVR rate of 72.2% vs 95.7% for patients without NS5A-RASs (P =.002). Conclusions: In this real-life GT3 cohort, the majority of failures harboured resistant variants carrying NS5A-RASs, the most frequent being Y93H. The presence of natural NS5A-RASs before treatment was associated with failure. Further analyses are needed to confirm this observation, particularly for the new current regimens.noneDi Maio V.C.; Barbaliscia S.; Teti E.; Fiorentino G.; Milana M.; Paolucci S.; Pollicino T.; Morsica G.; Starace M.; Bruzzone B.; Gennari W.; Micheli V.; Yu La Rosa K.; Foroghi L.; Calvaruso V.; Lenci I.; Polilli E.; Babudieri S.; Aghemo A.; Raimondo G.; Sarmati L.; Coppola N.; Pasquazzi C.; Baldanti F.; Parruti G.; Perno C.F.; Angelico M.; Craxi A.; Andreoni M.; Ceccherini-Silberstein F.; Andreone P.; Aragri M.; Bertoli A.; Boeri E.; Brancaccio G.; Brunetto M.; Callegaro A.P.; Cenderello G.; Cento V.; Ciaccio A.; Ciancio A.; Cuomo N.; De Santis A.; Di Biagio A.; Di Marco V.; Di Perri G.; Di Stefano M.A.; Gaeta G.B.; Ghisetti V.; Gulminetti R.; Lampertico P.; Landonio S.; Lichtner M.; Lleo A.; Maida I.; Marenco S.; Masetti C.; Mastroianni C.; Minichini C.; Milano E.; Monno L.; Novati S.; Pace Palitti V.; Paternoster C.; Pellicelli A.; Pieri A.; Puoti M.; Rizzardini G.; Ruggiero T.; Rossetti B.; Sangiovanni V.; Santantonio T.; Taliani G.; Toniutto P.; Vullo V.; Zazzi M.Di Maio, V. C.; Barbaliscia, S.; Teti, E.; Fiorentino, G.; Milana, M.; Paolucci, S.; Pollicino, T.; Morsica, G.; Starace, M.; Bruzzone, B.; Gennari, W.; Micheli, V.; Yu La Rosa, K.; Foroghi, L.; Calvaruso, V.; Lenci, I.; Polilli, E.; Babudieri, S.; Aghemo, A.; Raimondo, G.; Sarmati, L.; Coppola, N.; Pasquazzi, C.; Baldanti, F.; Parruti, G.; Perno, C. F.; Angelico, M.; Craxi, A.; Andreoni, M.; Ceccherini-Silberstein, F.; Andreone, P.; Aragri, M.; Bertoli, A.; Boeri, E.; Brancaccio, G.; Brunetto, M.; Callegaro, A. P.; Cenderello, G.; Cento, V.; Ciaccio, A.; Ciancio, A.; Cuomo, N.; De Santis, A.; Di Biagio, A.; Di Marco, V.; Di Perri, G.; Di Stefano, M. A.; Gaeta, G. B.; Ghisetti, V.; Gulminetti, R.; Lampertico, P.; Landonio, S.; Lichtner, M.; Lleo, A.; Maida, I.; Marenco, S.; Masetti, C.; Mastroianni, C.; Minichini, C.; Milano, E.; Monno, L.; Novati, S.; Pace Palitti, V.; Paternoster, C.; Pellicelli, A.; Pieri, A.; Puoti, M.; Rizzardini, G.; Ruggiero, T.; Rossetti, B.; Sangiovanni, V.; Santantonio, T.; Taliani, G.; Toniutto, P.; Vullo, V.; Zazzi, M